[interznakinfo]

[DeedPatmeda]

Originally posted by Winston
Good. I suppose now they'll return to the on-going project of feeding their people and lowering illiteracy rates to about the Tanzanian level.

Oh, the Moon. Right. Are you talking about the Chinese or the Americans?

[tpJKhY8Z]

This is the Tiawan Strait which we have been plowing through it over and over to intimidate the Chinesse, they probably just parked the sub in our usual path with the engines off and wait for the fleet to pass over head and just float to the surface. Theirs no sound to detect what so ever in that kind of senario and its a logical defense if you know your enemy is going to come through a particular piece of water. I'm sure the Chinesse planned all this very carfully and deliberatly to counter-intimidate us or at the least shake our confidence. I don't dout they were prepared to lose the sub in question should we be trigger happy and blow it out of the water just to see how close it got before being blown up.

[Aztegjpl]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
Theirs no sound to detect what so ever in that kind of senario and its a logical defense if you know your enemy is going to come through a particular piece of water. Well, what about active detection then? They can't just rely on passive sensors for everything.

[Heacechig]

I am sure there will be another 100bn in next budget to remedy the situation, which will be borrowed from the Chineze

[Loxaeed]

Originally posted by LordShiva



Hey its a valid question!

[Gubocang]

The Pentagon fabricated this entire leak to lull the Chinese into a false sense of security.

[Vezazvqw]

I think Impaler got it, they were using pretty much the same course for the Carrier group, and on the 11 billionth run through the Chinese put a sub in the pathway.

And this isn't the first time that the US has made this kind of mistake either.

[Controller]

How is this breaking news or weird?

IMO it would be more weird if this didn't happen.

[DoctorIrokezov]

Not too surprising. If our leaders are naive enough to run a trade deficit by buying cheap plastic sh*t from China for 30+ years now, we're probably naive enough to think their navy isn't a threat.

[VIAGRA-VIAGRA]

Originally posted by Pekka
BC, I always make sense. The only thing that differs is your capability of grasping it.

[mGUuZRyA]

Or just the mere fact that people believe in "armies that can't be beaten". A super small subset of that would be "the ability to do small things" like this. If someone really believes this shouldn't be possible, man, wake up, illusions are getting the best of you.

First of all, this isn't weird, second of all, this doesn't mean the Chinese are going to attack. We've had fighters coming to our airspace from BOTH neighbouring countries in the last month, adn the Swedes were hunting (or Norwegians) some sub not long time ago in their own waters. And the relationship between our countries couldn't get much better.

THis kind of **** happens all the time. Oh yeah, and we all do it as well. To our friends as well. So that's the reality, if you don't do any surveillance to your friends, then you don't love them enough

And what can you do? Put walls in the water so they can't come with their subs?

[ViaplyVuple]

And what the army says about their capabilities are always the biggest lie you could ever hear anyway. First hand experience tells me that it's feed to us so that we wouldn't feel insecure. As if the raincoat will save me from a fallout. Seriously. I was taught to dig a hole, go in it and cover myself with the "NBC suit" which actually was a raincoat, and a shitty one at that becuase the rule was you'd get more wet wearing it. The gasmask doesn't save me from that chemical attack, it just makes me last a bit longer. And then what happens is you get out from that hole and you spank your fellows with twigs, to "shrug off" the poison, get naked and get "cleaned", which really is just a shower.

So you do this why? So that you think you actually have a chance. But it's ridiculous, unless I get those real space man suits, which I don't have time to put on unless I'm already wearing it. THAT could save me.

Oh and of course the true firepower when facing a chopper, yes, just lean against this tree and you all fire at the same time with your assault rifles. Sure, it'll work. And this tree that has the same width as my head, it'll also cover me from the firepower and rocket attacks. "The Vietnamese took down most choppers they got with this method". Sure. Few Hueys maybe, that are the size of my testicles and are meant for other purposes, that surely is comparable to modern assault helicopters, because they can't handle assault rifles. Right.

Then later the truth comes out as in it's used so that the pilot might think it's actually a bigger caliber and even though that bigger caliber won't hurt the chopper, they might climb up a little anyway, so they'll be in range for missiles and rockets that can actually take them down. So wait, what about the whole story about Vietnam? Oh, that's right, I'm not supposed to ask any questions.

So you can all go ahead and believe when some general tells you, that we got this mega computer that destroys everyone in all situations. Then remember the people who actually operate them. Yes, the guys you see every day. So no, I don't think so. It's a big make belief the whole thing. Against push over countries they still matter but mostly the value is in deterrent. In all out war against real armies, the "plans" fly right out the window, unless they have plan b that actually is realistic.

[Stasher11]

Impaler merely described one method with which a determined sub skipper could have gotten so close to the carrier; this does not indicate surprise, discount other methods, or even imply that it hasn't been done before by other countries (which is virtually common knowledge, especially on a forum chock-full of military geeks where there have been threads like this in the past).

Meanwhile Whoha himself said that this has happened before, which blows your argument out of the water (no pun intended).

[BritneySpearsFun@@@]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I want to know why we didn't sink it... a submarine close enough to hit our carrier should bloody well be sunk, or at least boarded. You don't know what some rogue Chinese agent might do with a ship (or rogue Al Qaeda agent)... If everyone got in such a hissy-fit over a Chinese fighter going down when it clipped a U.S. recon plane by accident, what do you think would happen if the U.S. navy sunk one of China's most advanced submarines, 60-man crew and all, for harmlessly surfacing in international waters?

[tsovimnpb]

Originally posted by Darius871
If everyone got in such a hissy-fit over a Chinese fighter going down when it clipped a U.S. recon plane by accident, what do you think would happen if the U.S. navy sunk one of China's most advanced submarines, 60-man crew and all, for harmlessly surfacing in international waters? The Chinese by their conduct said that was A-OK.

[mr.videomen]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Quite true, but it all boils down to one thing - it was pure accident / routine maneuvres that made it possible for the chinese subs to do what they did - not due to chinese capabilities.

Having such fantasies about supremacy can be extremely lethal. I think you're construing attitudes that weren't ever actually expressed. Nobody here has said the Chinese aren't capable of sneaking a sub through a U.S. carrier's defensive screen. If anyone would care to make that argument now, I'll gladly laugh at them with you.

[art_fan_12]

so there's nothing to gain... The capture of the sub? Interrorgation of any survivors?

[ZESINTERS]

Capturing the sub is only useful if it's done Red October-style

[gundas]

Is it just me, or isn't sneaking into strike range what subs were designed to do?

And yes, carriers are useless for modern warfare. They're only good at extending the strike range of aircraft vs. nations w/o the capability of retaliating against it.