rhino 0 #1 September 25, 2004 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6091020/ And it begins..... Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #2 September 25, 2004 QuoteAnd it begins..... You mean something else for the Liberals to whine about? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #3 September 25, 2004 It would be nice if they brought the Pueblo home.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #4 September 25, 2004 Quote You mean something else for the Liberals to whine about? It's going to be tough for libs to complain and still remain logically consistent. Because lately they've been heard to argue "Well, what about N Korea?? he's a worse dictator and already has some of the worst wmd there are?" I realize the premise of this movement is missle defense, but I doubt that liberals in the US nor the N Korean gov't will see or spin it that way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #5 September 25, 2004 QuoteIt's going to be tough for libs to complain and still remain logically consistent. Since when are libs consistent let alone logical? Just look at the many different stances their man has made on Iraq alone! Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #6 September 25, 2004 Media sensationalism. Destroyers commonly deploy in that area. I was a line officer on a destroyer out of Yokosuka, Japan and have been to South Korea so many times it's not even funny. The state-of-the-art destoyers are Arleigh Burke class, which have been around for quite some time. 'State-of-the-art' would more aptly describe the software load-out of their computer systems. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,129 #7 September 25, 2004 I doubt it. The "Bush Doctrine" of pre-emptive war has been a fiasco so far. I can't believe even Bush would be so stupid as to try it again.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #8 September 25, 2004 All depends on what he wants to do with the destroyers. A "missle shield" sounds to me like they have some sort of Patriot Missles mounted on them, which if they were being used to defend Japan and Taiwan would be perfectly fine by me. Certainly doesn't sound like pre-emptive strike stuff yet. Personally I'd rather just repeal EO12333 and be done with it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #9 September 25, 2004 QuoteI doubt it. The "Bush Doctrine" of pre-emptive war has been a fiasco so far. I can't believe even Bush would be so stupid as to try it again. I haven't heard the UN calling for any consequences as to N.K. So, your claim that of Bush Doctrine is a little flawed in that regard. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,129 #10 September 25, 2004 QuoteQuoteI doubt it. The "Bush Doctrine" of pre-emptive war has been a fiasco so far. I can't believe even Bush would be so stupid as to try it again. I haven't heard the UN calling for any consequences as to N.K. So, your claim that of Bush Doctrine is a little flawed in that regard. What has the Bush Doctrine got to do with the U.N.? It's the policy that's flawed, not my claim.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #11 September 26, 2004 QuoteAll depends on what he wants to do with the destroyers. A "missle shield" sounds to me like they have some sort of Patriot Missles mounted on them, which if they were being used to defend Japan and Taiwan would be perfectly fine by me.... I agree. We certainly have a history of deploying weapon systems before they are perfected. This is a good time to test things.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TheAnvil 0 #12 September 26, 2004 No Patriots, my friend. Standard Missiles launched from a Vertical Launch System will be the missiles used. Putting Patriots on the destroyers we have based out of Japan wouldn't be a smart move. Whole lot of engineering issues would need to be resolved. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #13 September 26, 2004 I'll have to take your word for it. My knowledge of ship based missles is a couple of decades old and I don't keep up with it at all.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christoofar 0 #14 September 26, 2004 Was that article correct? Did I read the words "Japanese Destroyer?" I thought they were completely disarmed after surrender and only have a civilian peacekeeping force. Did it only apply to just troops? ____________________________________________________________ I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhreeZone 20 #15 September 26, 2004 I was reading the Patroit really was'nt that effective of an anti-missle platform either. It's kill rate was about 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 during GW1 and Raython had to go back to the start to get a lot of the issues worked out in them. Luckly even with a 1:5 rate if you toss up 10 missles you'll likely hit it.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vmsfreaky1 0 #16 September 26, 2004 since when are liberals only confined to north america? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christoofar 0 #17 September 26, 2004 That's if the missles in flight don't cause confusion with each other (hope not). A lot of missle systems are on QNX OS or a very close cousin, and the highest level languages are usually ADA,C,C++ (but a lot of ASM is also necessary too). Considering how much debugging you have to do before you can even dream of getting to production... gonna take a lot more work to get the kinks worked out. ____________________________________________________________ I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TheAnvil 0 #18 September 26, 2004 They have the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force. Quite capable, actually. Several destroyers with the AEGIS radar system and associated missiles. The JMSDF also has submarines that are extremely capable. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhino 0 #19 September 26, 2004 QuoteCertainly doesn't sound like pre-emptive strike stuff yet. I hear you.. But the firepower of those 2 destroyers and the fleet with them is enough to make the North Koreans sweat. The cruise missiles alone could eliminate any target in NK within 30 minutes if we need them to. They also carry a nuclear payload if necessary. This sounds like a good move to me.. I am looking to see a carrier group stationed there soon as well. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #20 September 26, 2004 Quote Just look at the many different stances their man has made on Iraq alone! You got a point there. First it war about WMD, then it was to free the Irakies, then it was about terrorism, and now it seems to be something else.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jimbarry 0 #21 September 26, 2004 QuoteQuote Just look at the many different stances their man has made on Iraq alone! You got a point there. First it war about WMD, then it was to free the Irakies, then it was about terrorism, and now it seems to be something else.... Really? Going to war must only have one reason? Seems to me if we're going to battle, it better be as the last resort, it better be because not going to battle is in the long run a worse alternative, and there better be lots of reasons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites b1jercat 0 #22 September 26, 2004 FWIW, the problem was the trigger, the closing speeds are incredible. blues jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhreeZone 20 #23 September 26, 2004 Yep, 1000+ miles an hour. A second too late and you are hundreds of feet apart and its a miss, a second too soon and the missle might be damaged, but not destroyed. Not an envyable to design system by anymeans.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites likearock 2 #24 September 26, 2004 QuoteYep, 1000+ miles an hour. A second too late and you are hundreds of feet apart and its a miss, a second too soon and the missle might be damaged, but not destroyed. Not an envyable to design system by anymeans. Too bad they can't program the Patriot to do a U-turn and actually fly in the same direction as its target for a bit. That strategy might result in a better hit ratio. Wayne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #25 September 26, 2004 Quote and the highest level languages are usually ADA aggggh make the bad man stop!!! you have no idea how much that fucking language has made my life miserable doing systems integration work......... Anyone know if the USS Blue Ridge is part of the 7th fleet? I became a shellback on that ship when we upgraded their tracking systems...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
TheAnvil 0 #12 September 26, 2004 No Patriots, my friend. Standard Missiles launched from a Vertical Launch System will be the missiles used. Putting Patriots on the destroyers we have based out of Japan wouldn't be a smart move. Whole lot of engineering issues would need to be resolved. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #13 September 26, 2004 I'll have to take your word for it. My knowledge of ship based missles is a couple of decades old and I don't keep up with it at all.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christoofar 0 #14 September 26, 2004 Was that article correct? Did I read the words "Japanese Destroyer?" I thought they were completely disarmed after surrender and only have a civilian peacekeeping force. Did it only apply to just troops? ____________________________________________________________ I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #15 September 26, 2004 I was reading the Patroit really was'nt that effective of an anti-missle platform either. It's kill rate was about 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 during GW1 and Raython had to go back to the start to get a lot of the issues worked out in them. Luckly even with a 1:5 rate if you toss up 10 missles you'll likely hit it.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vmsfreaky1 0 #16 September 26, 2004 since when are liberals only confined to north america? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christoofar 0 #17 September 26, 2004 That's if the missles in flight don't cause confusion with each other (hope not). A lot of missle systems are on QNX OS or a very close cousin, and the highest level languages are usually ADA,C,C++ (but a lot of ASM is also necessary too). Considering how much debugging you have to do before you can even dream of getting to production... gonna take a lot more work to get the kinks worked out. ____________________________________________________________ I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #18 September 26, 2004 They have the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force. Quite capable, actually. Several destroyers with the AEGIS radar system and associated missiles. The JMSDF also has submarines that are extremely capable. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #19 September 26, 2004 QuoteCertainly doesn't sound like pre-emptive strike stuff yet. I hear you.. But the firepower of those 2 destroyers and the fleet with them is enough to make the North Koreans sweat. The cruise missiles alone could eliminate any target in NK within 30 minutes if we need them to. They also carry a nuclear payload if necessary. This sounds like a good move to me.. I am looking to see a carrier group stationed there soon as well. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #20 September 26, 2004 Quote Just look at the many different stances their man has made on Iraq alone! You got a point there. First it war about WMD, then it was to free the Irakies, then it was about terrorism, and now it seems to be something else.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #21 September 26, 2004 QuoteQuote Just look at the many different stances their man has made on Iraq alone! You got a point there. First it war about WMD, then it was to free the Irakies, then it was about terrorism, and now it seems to be something else.... Really? Going to war must only have one reason? Seems to me if we're going to battle, it better be as the last resort, it better be because not going to battle is in the long run a worse alternative, and there better be lots of reasons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b1jercat 0 #22 September 26, 2004 FWIW, the problem was the trigger, the closing speeds are incredible. blues jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #23 September 26, 2004 Yep, 1000+ miles an hour. A second too late and you are hundreds of feet apart and its a miss, a second too soon and the missle might be damaged, but not destroyed. Not an envyable to design system by anymeans.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #24 September 26, 2004 QuoteYep, 1000+ miles an hour. A second too late and you are hundreds of feet apart and its a miss, a second too soon and the missle might be damaged, but not destroyed. Not an envyable to design system by anymeans. Too bad they can't program the Patriot to do a U-turn and actually fly in the same direction as its target for a bit. That strategy might result in a better hit ratio. Wayne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #25 September 26, 2004 Quote and the highest level languages are usually ADA aggggh make the bad man stop!!! you have no idea how much that fucking language has made my life miserable doing systems integration work......... Anyone know if the USS Blue Ridge is part of the 7th fleet? I became a shellback on that ship when we upgraded their tracking systems...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
