A Hypothetical Confrontation With China and Survivability Of The US Aircraft Carrier

a reply to: WeMustCare

Not too very much difference.


Ai has access to more information than a geriatric vegetable.


I had to manipulate the parameters I submitted to get the response I wanted. LOL

a reply to: charlest2

You say libertairian but do conflate libertairian with progressivism? Screw progressivism.

No I didn’t.

Don’t get all salty when you brought it to your own thread and got egg on your face for calling someone a lefty and it didn’t stick.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

No sweetheart. You started this controversy.

America bad.

Russia China based.

Remember now? Your very first troll.

a reply to: charlest2

How is that political?

Russia is invading a country and taking its territory.

China has said that they’re eventually going to force Taiwan to assimilate into the CCP which is clearly against their wishes.

The US isn’t without its foreign policy blunders, but in recent history we didn’t take the territory of countries we invaded.

And then we gave the coalition of China, Russia, and Iran.

If Russia is being bullied, why do most of the former USSR nations want nothing to do with them?

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: WeMustCare

Not too very much difference.

Ai has access to more information than a geriatric vegetable.

Ummm think about that statement for a moment. Does AI really have access to more information or is it over-hyped? For some reason I cannot see all of our cards being on the table so to speak. How much do you really think we know for certain about our carriers? These hypotheticals rely too heavy on slanted information. I doubt that the AI has access to any real military intelligence.

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You'll probably vote for the geriatric vegetable again too.

You need to be more specific.

Which geriatric vegetable are you referring to?

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Aircraftcarriers are the Battleships of the 1950's and are pretty much Obsolete,,,,,,,,,

So true. War is obsolete....

After consideration, I don't think space-based weapons systems would have much impact on protecting our resources in such a scenario. Far too limited in scope and numbers.

I would be more shocked if it turns out we don't have some surprise "shock and awe" none of us have even imagined yet for all hell breaking out day. Think 30-40 years out from the tech in our hands. That is how this thing works. Someone has something superior that they hold back till the moment of truth. China has numbers to see what that is before they move too far and that is the real problem. Once the pandora's box is opened, the enemy gets to play with defense. Being able to adapt during war is why the west beat the Axis powers.

a reply to: Justoneman

Stuxtnet meets Pegasus.

a reply to: hangedman13

I think I did mention I was not a military or naval aficionado and the scenario was crude and incomplete. And maybe others here could provide additional suggestions to make it more complete.

It's just hypothetical musings imagining the potential outcomes in a scenario such as that. An immaginary work in progress, so to speak.

a reply to: Justoneman

You mean something like the drone wars that evolved in Ukraine? Using small assembly line drones to drop grenades on the enemy? They are killing more than the artillery is. Destroying more armored military hardware as well. Those little bastards have become the mainstay of the Ukrainian military and wreaking havoc on both sides of the fence.

Oh, you mean some unknown sophisticated futuristic $h!t that costs a billion dollars a pop.

originally posted by: charlest2


Get back on topic, please. Political bantering has been well overdone on this site, with nothing accomplished on either side of that debate.

you are not wrong there, but its ok for you to partake, no one in that thread said anything about this comment though

originally posted by: charlest2 Obummer had to take his hand and lead him off stage at the end. X

As for AI can it work without power yet, conversing with it is akin to scrolling farcebook

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: hangedman13

I think I did mention I was not a military or naval aficionado and the scenario was crude and incomplete. And maybe others here could provide additional suggestions to make it more complete.

It's just hypothetical musings imagining the potential outcomes in a scenario such as that. An immaginary work in progress, so to speak.

One you forget carriers can move and tracking them even by satellite is difficult as long as they stay moving. And do to the fact they are nuclear they can indeed maintain over 30 knots. Meaning by the time a missile gets there the carrier is already gone. Then there is the shear fact of size a nuclear blast does not destroy a carrier. This was shown in nuclear tests where they were attempting to sink the carrier. It would need a direct hit which would be extremely hard to do as it can move.

Next carriers do not wander off by themselves they have a fleet near by armed with ABMs try8ng to overwhelm a carrier fleet wouldn't be easy and would give so much advanced warning they would simply move. The only real threat to a carrier is subs. And Chinese subs are way to noisy and being tracked to prevent them sneaking anywhere.

a reply to: UpIsNowDown2

Boy howdy, you had to search high and low for that, didn't you? I can't even remember in which thread that was posted but I'm sure it wasn't here. Enlighten me. Which thread did you find that comment. Let's see if the context fit that comment.


Corn Pop Revisited
A purely political OP.


This post was supposed to be about aircraft carrier survivability in a war with China. Jesus, how quickly it got diverted, from the get-go.

a reply to: charlest2


Well...Charles...in my defense...I spoke to the conditioning of the population by our government...and to the programming required to get said population onboard a conflict with China...

I also inferred the results of said conditioning...even within the membership of this site...

I was not addressing politics...per se...rather...I was addressing the resultant end game that politico's and their mouthpiece...the MSM...are directing the herd into supporting...

Whether or not the AI program relates the findings of various think tanks about plausible or implausible scenarios into conclusion...is not quite so relevant as the malleable nature of those who are easily swayed by programming...

It's obvious why the powers that be would require and instigate conflict...however...what's not so obvious...is why any sane individual would allow itself to be led into supporting such...especially when those who enrich themselves on conflict...are causal in the negative hardships the greater unwashed suffer as the result of conflict...

As for the scenario...the Us has no means to guard against hypersonic missiles at present...I think the AI is incorrect...I think that with swarm drones and hypersonic maneuverable missiles...the entire fleet would be sunk...

Swarm their defenses...then strike with the hypersonics and subs...game over...

"The only winning scenario...Is not to play"...

Oddly...the answer to just such a question...by a fictitious AI...


YouSir

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You'll probably vote for the geriatric vegetable again too.

You need to be more specific.

Which geriatric vegetable are you referring to?

Ummm...the one currently holding the off switch to the human race...?

Just a guess...


YouSir

a reply to: YouSir



No problem. You're not wrong.

a reply to: charlest2


One other caveat I should have included in your scenario...Swarm the fleets defenses in waves...over a period of time...with armed sacrificial drones so that the fleet first expends it's finite supply of missiles and rounds...then swarm them again...and under the swarm cover hit them with the hypersonics and subs...

Remember...drones will not just be airborne...but surface and submersible as well...


YouSir

a reply to: charlest2

I had to manipulate the parameters I submitted to get the response I wanted.

So you had to 'manipulate' the question to get the answer you already had and wanted?
In effect you had the answer first and sought out a scenario that would fit that answer?

a reply to: YouSir

Don't you feel guilty about being right all the time?

I do!

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Aircraftcarriers are the Battleships of the 1950's and are pretty much Obsolete,,,,,,,,,

So true. War is obsolete....

After consideration, I don't think space-based weapons systems would have much impact on protecting our resources in such a scenario. Far too limited in scope and numbers.

Ah , what do you Think Started the Maui Fires ?