OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
They`ve popped up so China knows they are there.
Do you support or oppose the Iran nuclear deal?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
Shall I show you the Cold War Navy relics washed up on Russian shores ??
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
What a waste of SSN`s
Attachments
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Iran is run by moderates now, and they're blowing up ISIS while America continues to arm them.
How can you call them batshit crazy?
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
Money management....
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
lol do you not think usa has naval cemetaries ??? dont kid your self here is one but not naval
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
Discontinued is not the same as cannot afford..........
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Only going by what they've said, not what they've done. I should know better, that's how a warmonger wins a peace prize.
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
Those are in rows, neatly stored,...your are in piles washed up...................
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
so it makes a diff lol wtf
you odd ball do you think China will surpase usa as the next superpower
remember in order to be a superpower you also need money by the way how much you owe china ?? and what if which is starting to happen china starts dumping the note and russia follows my guess europe would not want to be left behind they follow all of a sudden US currency is not world currency what do you think will happen then did you know china or russa could defeat USA with out even dropping bomb this way alone and all they do is sit back and watch USA start eatting it self from inside out lets face 99 percent of all goods are not made in usa thems are facts ,, hat if china raises costs instead of that 300 pc its no 1300 dollars that TV no such thng as 50 " 600 dollar TV its 3000 dollars what do you think ll happen ??
If they change oil currency to the euro instead of the 40 dollar barrel US
would that not crush us economy ??
In the back half of the 20th century, the US emerged as an economic, military and cultural behemoth which stared down the USSR after a decades-long rivalry to finally claim the title of the biggest kid in a big playground.
And so it has been for a quarter of a century.
But in the last few years, the narrative has shifted to include a new contender for the crown. In this so-called Asian Century, the scenario where China becomes the pre-eminent player in the global power game is becoming less a matter of ‘if’ than ‘when’.one significant advantage China has over the US is the low household debt of Chinese consumers. A culture of fiscal discipline and saving means the ordinary Chinese consumer will be sitting on money hidden away in bank accounts and under mattresses than US consumers, who, as the subprime crisis illustrated so tragically, are more likely to accumulate personal debt.
curious are you debt free
you odd ball do you think China will surpase usa as the next superpower
remember in order to be a superpower you also need money by the way how much you owe china ?? and what if which is starting to happen china starts dumping the note and russia follows my guess europe would not want to be left behind they follow all of a sudden US currency is not world currency what do you think will happen then did you know china or russa could defeat USA with out even dropping bomb this way alone and all they do is sit back and watch USA start eatting it self from inside out lets face 99 percent of all goods are not made in usa thems are facts ,, hat if china raises costs instead of that 300 pc its no 1300 dollars that TV no such thng as 50 " 600 dollar TV its 3000 dollars what do you think ll happen ??
If they change oil currency to the euro instead of the 40 dollar barrel US
would that not crush us economy ??
In the back half of the 20th century, the US emerged as an economic, military and cultural behemoth which stared down the USSR after a decades-long rivalry to finally claim the title of the biggest kid in a big playground.
And so it has been for a quarter of a century.
But in the last few years, the narrative has shifted to include a new contender for the crown. In this so-called Asian Century, the scenario where China becomes the pre-eminent player in the global power game is becoming less a matter of ‘if’ than ‘when’.one significant advantage China has over the US is the low household debt of Chinese consumers. A culture of fiscal discipline and saving means the ordinary Chinese consumer will be sitting on money hidden away in bank accounts and under mattresses than US consumers, who, as the subprime crisis illustrated so tragically, are more likely to accumulate personal debt.
curious are you debt free
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
Actually if you do the the math it comes to over 150,000 you and every person in USA is in debt let alone visa , and other debt you occured ?? dam bro i mean baby born today in usa is in debt 150,000 at first breath back in 2004 it was
$72,051 per taxpayer in 2004 to $154,161 today. As the debt continues higher, the liability of every taxpayer is also rising. The change in the amount of the federal debt per taxpayer from 2004 to 2015 represents an average annual increase of 7.16%. This is much more than the average annual wage increase during the same period.
how do you like them big apples
$72,051 per taxpayer in 2004 to $154,161 today. As the debt continues higher, the liability of every taxpayer is also rising. The change in the amount of the federal debt per taxpayer from 2004 to 2015 represents an average annual increase of 7.16%. This is much more than the average annual wage increase during the same period.
how do you like them big apples
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
The real sad truth is i will get replies that like it will also hurt china if they pull the plug on the us currency aand trufully speaking that is a lame BS concept you actually think it ould hurt china
LEts put it in another perspective i am a loan shark and you need money who becomes in debt ??? the person wanting the money obviously me as a loan shark am not giving you my last 100 dollars lol there fore i had the money to loan you and not go hungry even if the person died tomorow i would live on take my loss but it wouldnt make a dent
you think it would crush china if usa folded tomorrow nd never paid them lol think again china will take a loss but they will still have purchasing power where as you will not
LEts put it in another perspective i am a loan shark and you need money who becomes in debt ??? the person wanting the money obviously me as a loan shark am not giving you my last 100 dollars lol there fore i had the money to loan you and not go hungry even if the person died tomorow i would live on take my loss but it wouldnt make a dent
you think it would crush china if usa folded tomorrow nd never paid them lol think again china will take a loss but they will still have purchasing power where as you will not
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
The other Kirov is being modernized and won't be out of port. As far as I can tell all the news was from 2013 and both Kirovs are in port, with one fully operational (Pyotr Velikiy). Also all our Iowa-classes are either museum ships or have been scrapped. A Kirov could unfortunately destroy an Iowa at range which is why we've mothballed the Iowas and focus on our guided missile cruises to overwhelm the CIWS of a Kirov.
We attacked Iran plenty, but back in the 1980s. Gulf of Sidra and a couple of other operations where we really messed up Iran's navy. Then again that's why they want India and Russia to hurry up with the BrahMos, so they can have it and we can't get close again to them. This is also why I support the Iran nuclear deal because hopefully it'll be a stepping stone to normalizing relations with Iran, which is a really good thing. Hopefully, eventually, Iranians can begin to come over to Western schools more and more, go back to Iran, and more and more moderates will come about.There is a very good reason why USA keeps there ships fairly good distance away and that is from Russia cruise missiles which have been parked in Iran for sometime you ever wonder why USA never attacked iran ???
This is such complete BS and the US Navy called it "standard harassment." This has never been independently verified, and it takes a lot more than what a Mig has on it to take down an Aegis system. Trust me, I know people who've worked on these ships for years.
Serbia, Former Yugoslavia, not exactly 3rd world. Also the way they did it was SUPER clever.
1945. Anybody who knows about the history of nuclear energy knows that the first people to prove fission of heavy elements were Germans, Otto Hahn and Strassman. Lise Meitner and Otto Frisch went on a year later, in 1939 to explain it theoretically. Also, anybody who knows about the Manhattan Project and the nuclear arms race also knows that Germany actually was not anywhere near making an atomic bomb. Also, Einstein didn't write the letter himself, it was written by Leó Szilárd (hugely important to the Manhattan Project) and signed by Einstein. It was written also with Edward Teller and Eugene Wigner, two other hugely important figures in the Manhattan Project and Los Alamos, and it merely warned that Nazi Germany could potentially develop a bomb. This is very important to note because the uncontrolled chain reaction of fission that occurs in an atomic weapon was first hypothesized and then proven by Leó Szilárd who was in the United States. This is also the basis for nuclear energy, it's however a controlled nuclear chain reaction. Szilárd and Enrico Fermi in 1939 that were able to make the first fission via neutron multiplication in uranium thus proving that a nuclear chain reaction was possible. Fermi should be a very well known name because of Fermilab the Department of Energy's national laboratory that specializes in high-energy particle physics and named after Enrico Fermi, an Italian physicist who taught at the University of Chicago. The first nuclear reactor was also built by Fermi and is called Chicago Pile-1 because it was made at the University of Chicago. So, to go onto your next claim...
Ooooooooooooooops, hate to say it but @OddBall1st is completely correct. How did the Soviets get their hands on it? 1948 via spies in the British and US government. I seriously learned this in Middle School.
Yeah, China did us a favor there. Showed us a weakness and nothing happened. China even apologized. As far as Oppenheimer? He was born in New York City, his father being a Jewish textile importer from Germany. He studied at Harvard, Cambridge, Göttingen, taught at Caltech and then at UC Berkeley where he worked with Ernest O. Lawrence. Ernest Lawrence should ring familiar with you because he invented the cyclotron, or how you actually enrich uranium and plutonium. Lawrence would win the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1939 for inventing this.
Take off the tin foil hat.
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
China holds our currency as an investment. Why the fuck would you dump an investment with no return? That's like me dropping 50,000 on grow gear, doing one run, and then just dumping it all in the garbage.
They tie their currency to it also. Them dumping the dollar would be economic suicide. This is seriously one of the most misunderstood arguments people make.
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
Quesiton is can USA stop the Brahmos ?? nope then you got the S 400's but lets not forget the real bad boy S 500 Prometheus name suits it
Is USA actually bankrupt ?? and just been doing the disney land tour of fucking course they have been
The debt-to GDP ratio compares the amount of the public debt to the size of the economy. For example, if GDP – which is the total of all goods and services produced in the U.S. – is $17.0 trillion and the debt is the same amount, the ratio would be 100%. As the debt rises beyond GDP, the ratio will exceed 100%. This indicates that the debt is greater than the total of what we produce. You might equate it to an individual’s debt-to-income ratio which helps lenders assess an individual’s ability to repay a loan. America’s debt-to-GDP ratio in 1980 was only 35.4%. Ten years later it was 57.7%. As you can see from the chart below, America’s debt-to-GDP ratio has continued to rise and today stands at 102.6%. Although this is not a staggering percentage, as an absolute number, $18.2 trillion in debt is very formidable.
Is USA actually bankrupt ?? and just been doing the disney land tour of fucking course they have been
The debt-to GDP ratio compares the amount of the public debt to the size of the economy. For example, if GDP – which is the total of all goods and services produced in the U.S. – is $17.0 trillion and the debt is the same amount, the ratio would be 100%. As the debt rises beyond GDP, the ratio will exceed 100%. This indicates that the debt is greater than the total of what we produce. You might equate it to an individual’s debt-to-income ratio which helps lenders assess an individual’s ability to repay a loan. America’s debt-to-GDP ratio in 1980 was only 35.4%. Ten years later it was 57.7%. As you can see from the chart below, America’s debt-to-GDP ratio has continued to rise and today stands at 102.6%. Although this is not a staggering percentage, as an absolute number, $18.2 trillion in debt is very formidable.
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
pmw, the Iowa has 32 tomahawks on board,...it`s the sprint speed giving Kirov an advantage at range.
That`s what I mean by ..'struck",...but they can be recalled under the deal. BB59 lost pinions and a shaft to them.
take two years to put them online again, mostly cleaning off the grease.
That`s what I mean by ..'struck",...but they can be recalled under the deal. BB59 lost pinions and a shaft to them.
take two years to put them online again, mostly cleaning off the grease.
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I know an Iowa now has 32 tomahawks on board, but the unfortunate thing is that the Russian's CIWS is probably one of the best CIWS out there. That's why we're going towards overwhelming them.
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
If your boss slashes your pay, if you have no savings because you spent more than you earned for many years, and if your creditors are threatening to cut off your credit cards and home equity loan, what happens?
The answer, of course, is that you're in serious trouble. And this could be the situation for the U.S. government -- which is facing lower income tax receipts and ballooning deficits -- if China loses its appetite for extending more and more loans by buying U.S. Treasury securities.
China is the single largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasurys. The money it lends to the Feds finances our significant budget deficits. (Americans have been paying about $450 billion a year in interest on the national credit card; without that debt to pay off, personal income taxes could be almost 40 percent lower.)
But in Beijing on Friday, Premier Wen Jiabao told reporters that he was worried about the U.S. becoming something of a, well, deadbeat. "We have made a huge amount of loans to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I'm a little bit worried," Wen said. "I would like to call on the United States to honor its words, stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets."
What China's premier may be worried about is the possibility of the U.S. running up so much debt -- the projected 2009 deficit is $1.75 trillion -- that it may not be able or willing to pay it back without devaluing the currency. (If that happens, hello, inflation!)
For its part, the White House tried to reassure its Chinese creditors. Spokesman Robert Gibbs said Friday afternoon: "There's no safer investment in the world than in the United States."
It's unlikely that China would dump its Treasurys; for one thing, substantial sales would depress prices of the rest of its portfolio. The Wall Street Journalsuggeststhat the gold market isn't large enough to represent a viable option, and "it's not clear, meanwhile, that euro, or yen-denominated debt is any safer, more liquid, or profitable than U.S. debt -- key criteria for China's leadership."
But China could reduce or halt future purchases. A less ravenous appetite for Treasurys is already evident: a New York Timesarticle in January was titled: "China Losing Taste for Debt From U.S." One reason for fewer purchases would be diversification. Another would be to divert money toward its own 4 trillion yuan ($586 billion) stimulus package.
Reduced demand for Treasurys would drive up U.S. interest rates, probably pushing down home prices even more than they've already fallen, and also couldstart a run on the dollar.
This is why Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pleaded with the Chinese government last month to keep the loans flowing to Washington, D.C. ("So by continuing to support American Treasury instruments, the Chinese are recognizing our interconnection.")
This is also why, at least in part, U.S. taxpayer dollars were used to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last year. A Business Weekarticle says that foreign bankers were worried, especially China, which owned around $376 billion of Fannie and Freddie debt. "Treasury saw foreign governments getting the willies," a Senate aide told the magazine.
The answer, of course, is that you're in serious trouble. And this could be the situation for the U.S. government -- which is facing lower income tax receipts and ballooning deficits -- if China loses its appetite for extending more and more loans by buying U.S. Treasury securities.
China is the single largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasurys. The money it lends to the Feds finances our significant budget deficits. (Americans have been paying about $450 billion a year in interest on the national credit card; without that debt to pay off, personal income taxes could be almost 40 percent lower.)
But in Beijing on Friday, Premier Wen Jiabao told reporters that he was worried about the U.S. becoming something of a, well, deadbeat. "We have made a huge amount of loans to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I'm a little bit worried," Wen said. "I would like to call on the United States to honor its words, stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets."
What China's premier may be worried about is the possibility of the U.S. running up so much debt -- the projected 2009 deficit is $1.75 trillion -- that it may not be able or willing to pay it back without devaluing the currency. (If that happens, hello, inflation!)
For its part, the White House tried to reassure its Chinese creditors. Spokesman Robert Gibbs said Friday afternoon: "There's no safer investment in the world than in the United States."
It's unlikely that China would dump its Treasurys; for one thing, substantial sales would depress prices of the rest of its portfolio. The Wall Street Journalsuggeststhat the gold market isn't large enough to represent a viable option, and "it's not clear, meanwhile, that euro, or yen-denominated debt is any safer, more liquid, or profitable than U.S. debt -- key criteria for China's leadership."
But China could reduce or halt future purchases. A less ravenous appetite for Treasurys is already evident: a New York Timesarticle in January was titled: "China Losing Taste for Debt From U.S." One reason for fewer purchases would be diversification. Another would be to divert money toward its own 4 trillion yuan ($586 billion) stimulus package.
Reduced demand for Treasurys would drive up U.S. interest rates, probably pushing down home prices even more than they've already fallen, and also couldstart a run on the dollar.
This is why Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pleaded with the Chinese government last month to keep the loans flowing to Washington, D.C. ("So by continuing to support American Treasury instruments, the Chinese are recognizing our interconnection.")
This is also why, at least in part, U.S. taxpayer dollars were used to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last year. A Business Weekarticle says that foreign bankers were worried, especially China, which owned around $376 billion of Fannie and Freddie debt. "Treasury saw foreign governments getting the willies," a Senate aide told the magazine.
Darth Vapour
Well-Known Member
lol tomohawks
Russia is currently developing the S-500 mobile surface-to-air missile system, which was announced to be deployed in 2013. The S-500 will be an upgraded version of the S-400. It will fulfill air defense and ballistic missile defense missions.
It is currently being developed to have the capability of destroying supersonic aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. While the S-400 is designed to defend against short and medium range missiles, the S-500 will be designed to combat intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). What remains a source of conjecture, however, is the kind of interception the S-500 missiles will use. In 2011, General Director of the Almaz-Antey corporation Igor Ashurbeili said that for the interception of ballistic missiles, the S-500 will “mostly” use nuclear warheads because these can destroy “the entire cloud of incoming warheads with no need to determine true threats from dummies.” 1 At the same time, reports about the new interceptors, the 77N6-N and 77N6-N1, suggest that system will employ hit-to-kill.
Line drawing of 9M82 and 9M83 missiles, which are used with the S-400 system.
Since it is still in development, little is known about the S-500 system. The system is expected to be capable of simultaneous engagement with up to 10 targets at a maximum range of 600 km. The S-400 can only handle a maximum of six targets up to a range of 400 km.2 The S-500’s interceptors will operate at an altitude higher than 185km. The system will have a response time of about three to four seconds, which is considerably shorter than the S-400 which is rated at nine to ten seconds. 3
Two new missiles have been designed for the S-500 (and the S-400): the 77N6-N and the 77N6-N1. They were reported to be capable of direct engagement with targets flying at hypersonic speeds (seven kilometers per second). However, it is not clear when the 77N6-N and the 77N6-N1 enter service given that facilities for their production have yet to be built. The agreed timeframe for the missiles’ delivery was reported to be early 2014. According to Izvestia, the new plants in Kirov and Nizhniy Novgorod will cost 41.6 and 39.5 billion rubles respectively.4
The S-500 is expected to use the following radars: the 91N6A(M) acquisition and battle
management radar, the revised 96L6-TsP acquisition radar, and the new 76T6 multimode
engagement and 77T6 ABM engagement radars.5
Russia is currently developing the S-500 mobile surface-to-air missile system, which was announced to be deployed in 2013. The S-500 will be an upgraded version of the S-400. It will fulfill air defense and ballistic missile defense missions.
It is currently being developed to have the capability of destroying supersonic aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. While the S-400 is designed to defend against short and medium range missiles, the S-500 will be designed to combat intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). What remains a source of conjecture, however, is the kind of interception the S-500 missiles will use. In 2011, General Director of the Almaz-Antey corporation Igor Ashurbeili said that for the interception of ballistic missiles, the S-500 will “mostly” use nuclear warheads because these can destroy “the entire cloud of incoming warheads with no need to determine true threats from dummies.” 1 At the same time, reports about the new interceptors, the 77N6-N and 77N6-N1, suggest that system will employ hit-to-kill.
Line drawing of 9M82 and 9M83 missiles, which are used with the S-400 system.
Since it is still in development, little is known about the S-500 system. The system is expected to be capable of simultaneous engagement with up to 10 targets at a maximum range of 600 km. The S-400 can only handle a maximum of six targets up to a range of 400 km.2 The S-500’s interceptors will operate at an altitude higher than 185km. The system will have a response time of about three to four seconds, which is considerably shorter than the S-400 which is rated at nine to ten seconds. 3
Two new missiles have been designed for the S-500 (and the S-400): the 77N6-N and the 77N6-N1. They were reported to be capable of direct engagement with targets flying at hypersonic speeds (seven kilometers per second). However, it is not clear when the 77N6-N and the 77N6-N1 enter service given that facilities for their production have yet to be built. The agreed timeframe for the missiles’ delivery was reported to be early 2014. According to Izvestia, the new plants in Kirov and Nizhniy Novgorod will cost 41.6 and 39.5 billion rubles respectively.4
The S-500 is expected to use the following radars: the 91N6A(M) acquisition and battle
management radar, the revised 96L6-TsP acquisition radar, and the new 76T6 multimode
engagement and 77T6 ABM engagement radars.5