US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[demicolon]

Carrier costs trillions to build and upkeep, a few thousand surface-to-sea missiles would cost billions at most. You can badmouth the Chinese for hours but you can't say they're stupid or cannot do math, which is why they'll carpet bomb whatever carrier the US dares to send near their coasts. Carriers are good for bullying poorfag coastal countries but unless we're going for total war against Cthulhu, nobody wearing brass is gonna risk their precious yachts in actual battle. Saturate a carrier and its escort's defense systems with cheap decoy missiles or drones, then send the real ones once they run out of ammo.

Tanks are good for levelling buildings but you can't do that anymore in the age where everyone and their grandma has a gayphone they'll use to record and publish every civilian casualty. It doesn't help that tank is like a thumb sticking out for every expendable cheapass sweatshop drone flying around.

Both are not completely useless but they're slowly going the way of the battleship. China making carriers is all about their stupid concept of face.

 

[Core Theorist]

Carrier costs trillions to build and upkeep, a few thousand surface-to-sea missiles would cost billions at most(...)

(...)Both are not completely useless but they're slowly going the way of the battleship. China making carriers is all about their stupid concept of face.

So... what's going to actually replace what the carrier actually does? Are they just gonna be smaller and not be big fleet carriers anymore?

 

[demicolon]

If the American defense industry cared about American defense and not stealing taxpayer money, carriers would probably just get slowly miniaturized over time in step with Air Force switching more and more to drones. Human-operated carriers and planes will always have a niche, but right now they're so goddamn expensive they're practically irreplacable and we've seen from Russo-Ukrainian war how extremely costly and precise but limited equipment fares against a ghetto-tier but easily replacable one.

If aliens are gonna invade us soon then F35 will finally get used to its full potential.

 

[The Ugly One]

Funny thing is, Chinese are very nouveau riche about it - they want to have carriers because every superpower has carriers, no matter how much of an useless money sink yachts carriers are in current realities of warfare. They are status symbols to them like gold chains are to rappers.

So what's the 21st century way to rapidly move aircraft within striking distance of any target in the world?

You can badmouth the Chinese for hours but you can't say they're stupid or cannot do math,

Spending billions and billions on completely unnecessary weapons systems sounds pretty stupid and mathematically illiterate to me.

If the American defense industry cared about American defense and not stealing taxpayer money, carriers would probably just get slowly miniaturized over time in step with Air Force switching more and more to drones.

How would we move these flying drones to somewhere far away, like Taiwan, fuel them, service them, and launch them? Would we perhaps use some sort of boat capable of carrying aircraft?

Tanks are good for levelling buildings but you can't do that anymore

Mariupol, 2022

 

[just Reading a post]

I think Trump will do the easy good guy shit and sign an EO saying TikTok can stay open. Pending some rules or something.
It is going to be funny watching the journoscum turn so hard on their current takes on Tiktoks ban if he did that. When Trump signs an EO saying it can come back. I would be archiving their hot takes., if i cared to troll them about it.

 

[demicolon]

So what's the 21st century way to rapidly move aircraft within striking distance of any target in the world?

Are you sure admiral Troonsocks has the balls to risk xis zillion dollar pretty baby boy becoming a very expensive coral reef on the bottom of the South China Sea?

Spending billions and billions on completely unnecessary weapons systems sounds pretty stupid and mathematically illiterate to me.

They're all about appearances, rich man has Lamborgini so rich Chinaman must have Lamborgini, too. It makes sense to them and they have (or had) so much money they couldn't find a place to store all of it if they wanted.

How would we move these flying drones to somewhere far away, like Taiwan, fuel them, service them, and launch them? Would we perhaps use some sort of boat capable of carrying aircraft?

How about a boat that doesn't cost the yearly GDP of a small country? For drones you could repurpose a much cheaper and smaller ship.

Mariupol, 2022

Russia stopped giving a shit about bad PR which is an exception in modern warfare and they're mostly hogs for artillery, which is much more cost-effective at turning Soviet blocks into fine dust. It's a different thing when you have a sniper hiding somewhere in an apartment building with civilians inside and you order the local Shilka to spray it all from top to down and let God sort it out, it works but will nuke any public goodwill especially if you're trying to appear as a "good" guy.

 

[SaidNoOneEver]

Spending billions and billions on completely unnecessary weapons systems sounds pretty stupid and mathematically illiterate to me.

That's billions and billions of little pieces of paper the Americans keep giving them. What's a better use for that paper than building defenses against all these American warships they keep parking off the Chinese coast?

 

[Disc]

How would we move these flying drones to somewhere far away, like Taiwan, fuel them, service them, and launch them? Would we perhaps use some sort of boat capable of carrying aircraft?

The point demicolon's trying to make is not that a carrier-like ship won't be a part of future warfare, but that the appropriate carrier ships for future warfare will not be the same as those for past warfare. They should be trying to make carriers as small and as fast as they can using drones as their aircraft rather than piloted vehicles, thus getting similar amounts of deadliness and sustainability and more speed and agility while still being cheaper to build, maintain, staff and even lose.

We're in a period of technology miniaturization, and they're treating it like a dick-measuring contest.

Edit: Took me a while to find an appropriate meme.

 

[The Ugly One]

Are you sure admiral Troonsocks has the balls to risk xis zillion dollar pretty baby boy becoming a very expensive coral reef on the bottom of the South China Sea?

Are you going to answer the question?

You're a rising power, China. You'd like to be a superpower. That would involve the ability to launch airstrikes anywhere. How, exactly, do you do this?

How about a boat that doesn't cost the yearly GDP of a small country? For drones you could repurpose a much cheaper and smaller ship.

A Nimitz-class carrier holds nearly 2,000 tons of aviation ordnance. It will typically carry around 60 fighter jets. Each one can carry about 9 tons of ordnance. So a Nimitz-class is capable of delivering, at maximum, 540 tons of ordnance at Mach 1.2 in a 150 mile radius. It is capable of doing this four times.

Explain how you could deliver this with much cheaper and smaller ships. I want to know the tonnages you've figured. What is your supersonic drone with a 150 mile range, how many do you need to deliver 500-600 tons of ordnance at various targets, and what does the support infrastructure for that drone look like?

 

[Your Girlfriend's Dad]

Carrier costs trillions to build and upkeep, a few thousand surface-to-sea missiles would cost billions at most. You can badmouth the Chinese for hours but you can't say they're stupid or cannot do math, which is why they'll carpet bomb whatever carrier the US dares to send near their coasts. Carriers are good for bullying poorfag coastal countries but unless we're going for total war against Cthulhu, nobody wearing brass is gonna risk their precious yachts in actual battle. Saturate a carrier and its escort's defense systems with cheap decoy missiles or drones, then send the real ones once they run out of ammo.

Tanks are good for levelling buildings but you can't do that anymore in the age where everyone and their grandma has a gayphone they'll use to record and publish every civilian casualty. It doesn't help that tank is like a thumb sticking out for every expendable cheapass sweatshop drone flying around.

Both are not completely useless but they're slowly going the way of the battleship. China making carriers is all about their stupid concept of face.

Not trillions dude. Billions. I think the Gerald Ford was like 15 billion. No need to throw a few orders of magnitude in there.

 

[SaidNoOneEver]

A Nimitz-class carrier holds nearly 2,000 tons of aviation ordnance. It will typically carry around 60 fighter jets. Each one can carry about 9 tons of ordnance. So a Nimitz-class is capable of delivering, at maximum, 540 tons of ordnance at Mach 1.2 in a 150 mile radius. It is capable of doing this four times.

15 years ago China had the capability to sink that carrier before it got within 1,000 miles of China at 1/5,000th the cost of that carrier. There's no telling what they can do now.

 

[Disc]

A Nimitz-class carrier holds nearly 2,000 tons of aviation ordnance. It will typically carry around 60 fighter jets. Each one can carry about 9 tons of ordnance. So a Nimitz-class is capable of delivering, at maximum, 540 tons of ordnance at Mach 1.2 in a 150 mile radius. It is capable of doing this four times.

Explain how you could deliver this with much cheaper and smaller ships. I want to know the tonnages you've figured. What is your supersonic drone with a 150 mile range, how many do you need to deliver 500-600 tons of ordnance at various targets, and what does the support infrastructure for that drone look like?

Ah yes, the 'show me the math that nobody here (including myself) actually knows how to do' argument.

At least as far as I know, the established layout doesn't exist yet. But that's the point - while other countries have existing carriers that have compatible aircraft and so have something that can fill the role well enough to not require replacing, anyone trying to make new carriers should be thinking ahead and considering the potential benefits of miniaturization and more automation. It's one thing to keep ships built 20-50 years ago that can still reliably do the job now; it's another thing entirely to build new designs using a 50-year-old ship as the template for scale and not considering the strategic possibilities of technological advancements, like how the Gerald Ford uses the EMALS system as opposed to steam catapults. the 2020s have been a decade where drones have massively increased their presence in combat; not factoring that into building ships that probably won't be out until 2030 is a mistake no matter how you slice it.

Anyone can figure that if you don't have to feed a squadron of 60 pilots plus any required staff aboard your ship (i'm not even gonna try to suggest you don't need the maintenance crews, it's a fucking carrier after all) that you can - at least in theory - save significant amounts of required space and weight for things like food storage and crew quarters. Similarly, while drone technology isn't there yet, there's no reason it couldn't get to similar or even better speeds and tonnages while maintaining a better price tag - again, especially if you don't have to put an adult human male you've trained for years in the middle of it.

And in turn, even if they fall slightly behind things like the nimitz and the Gerald Ford in overall spec, having smaller and cheaper carriers that can punch above their weight opens up tactical maneuvrability and reduces the cost of any given ship being destroyed. Especially considering the infamous chinesium these ships will inevitably be built out of, them being less costly to lose is a MASSIVE benefit. Instead, they don't want to have ships that aren't the biggest and chunkiest in the world, which is the wrong tactical plan to have here.

 

[teriyakiburns]

15 years ago China had the capability to sink that carrier before it got within 1,000 miles of China at 1/5,000th the cost of that carrier. There's no telling what they can do now.

muh hypersonics are a meme and China lies about its capabilities all the time. Stop falling for their shit.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

>Canada with America
>Greenland joins USA

Could the flag of this planet be the Earthican flag from Futurama by the year 3000?

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

Explain how you could deliver this

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dongfeng_(missile)

The problem isn’t that aircrap carriers can’t do anything - any tool can do something. It’s that they’re not worth the money and are too fragile for the cost for any country that isn’t Team America, world police.

It’s like battleships. They’re fucking amazing and nothing can deliver shells that large and that hard, but nobody builds them because cruise missiles exist.

 

[Core Theorist]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dongfeng_(missile)

The problem isn’t that aircrap carriers can’t do anything - any tool can do something. It’s that they’re not worth the money and are too fragile for the cost for any country that isn’t Team America, world police.

It’s like battleships. They’re fucking amazing and nothing can deliver shells that large and that hard, but nobody builds them because cruise missiles exist.

That's great and all but have you considred that missiles are pretty fucking gay?

I hate missiles so goddamn much. Why is everything these days reducible to "durr loitering munition drone missile xd"?

Please, I just want Minovsky Particles to be real. I can't fucking take it anymore. Durr missile, Durr missile, Durr missiles! Even lasers and railguns would be better! Anything but fucking missiles!

 

[Dagoth AMOGUS]

Someone said JD Vance is Jewish and like, they said it so seriously I didn’t know if they were kidding but is that true? I think we would have picked up on that a while ago

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

Someone said JD Vance is Jewish and like, they said it so seriously I didn’t know if they were kidding but is that true? I think we would have picked up on that a while ago

Yes. The JD stands for Jewish Dude.

 

[Disc]

That's great and all but have you considred that missiles are pretty fucking gay?

I hate missiles so goddamn much. Why is everything these days reducible to "durr loitering munition drone missile xd"?

Please, I just want Minovsky Particles to be real. I can't fucking take it anymore. Durr missile, Durr missile, Durr missiles! Even lasers and railguns would be better! Anything but fucking missiles!

War has become defined by a single op strat. Pls nerf.

 

[SaidNoOneEver]

muh hypersonics are a meme and China lies about its capabilities all the time. Stop falling for their shit.

It wasn't a secret in 2009. They don't need to be hypersonic if you can fire 500 in one salvo, there's no defense. Have you been paying attention to how the f'ing Houthi's have chased off our carriers repeatedly with a fraction of the tech? The surface fleet is obsolete against peer enemies and has been for a very long time.