Cruise Ships Vulnerable to Attacks

Originally posted by StarChild
U.S. Navy vs. Royal Navy

1. Size.

The US navy has a larger fleet, but that doesnt diminish thier capabilities.

2. Capabilities.

The RN is as capable of practically anything the USN can do, with the exception of 1 thing. A) we dont have supersonic fighter jets, yet.

3. Funding.

Well taking into account how much each country spends on thier forces there about equal.

4. Resources.

The RN has about the same resources.

5. Marine Units.

The RN has the best marines in the world IMO, better trained, fitter, stronger, faster and just better.

6. Special Forces Operations Capable Units.
7. Special Warfare Boat Units.
8. Hostage Rescue Teams.

The SBS, Mountain warfare cadre and Comanchio company cover all of the above.
The RM can cover the above to.

9. Explosive Ordnance Disposal Units.

RN divers and RM ordinance teams are the best in the buisness.

10. Airpower.

This is the only real area where the RN lacks, the RN has subsonic jets but the RN has the best helicopters in the world.

11. Sealift Capability.

The RN and the RFA ( The logistics people) have great sea lift , look up bay class.

12. Submarine Fleet.

Smaller than the US navy but is more highly trained.

Let's hear your input on the following subjects first, since you are so confident in your statements.

Sure.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

This is not necessary, like I suggested before a multi national operation would be the best way to go, from a military point of view. And the Royal Navy is just as capable as any other navy out there, so can we drop this “comparison”? There’s no point to it, and it will get out of hand really fast.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
This is not necessary, like I suggested before a multi national operation would be the best way to go, from a military point of view. And the Royal Navy is just as capable as any other navy out there, so can we drop this “comparison”? There’s no point to it, and it will get out of hand really fast.

But which nations?
Also, would you like several forign warships off your coast with no defence against them?

But which nations?

If possible the nations closest to those waters, and if that is not possible then the nations which have the capability and means to secure the waters. It really does not matter which ones it is, as long as they get the job done.

Also, would you like several forign warships off your coast with no defence against them?

If my coast was that insecure I think foreign warships securing it might be more beneficial to me then piracy would. Let’s be real here, the countries involved are not some prized land waiting to be invade by foreign nations for no reason.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
If possible the nations closest to those waters, and if that is not possible then the nations which have the capability and means to secure the waters. It really does not matter which ones it is, as long as they get the job done.

Would trust china if you asked to clear out the pirates in indonesia?

If my coast was that insecure I think foreign warships securing it might be more beneficial to me then piracy would. Let’s be real here, the countries involved are not some prized land waiting to be invade by foreign nations for no reason.

So you would have no problem if you lived in hawia and had chinese or russian warships lieing off your coast "dealing" with the pirates?

Hey, if China and Russia want to voluntary patrol waters for piracy then ok, but yeah there should be some oversight. I just think it adds more credibility and makes this option more feasible, rather than having one nation be responsible for securing piracy hotspots.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Hey, if China and Russia want to voluntary patrol waters for piracy then ok, but yeah there should be some oversight. I just think it adds more credibility and makes this option more feasible, rather than having one nation be responsible for securing piracy hotspots.

But what difference does it make if its one country or 50 , its not really credible until you include everyone...

But what difference does it make if its one country or 50 , its not really credible until you include everyone...

It makes a big difference, I don't think too many people would feel too good if the US decided to fight piracy by itself. Politically and practically I think its better to have multiple countries involved, and I could care less who they are.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
It makes a big difference, I don't think too many people would feel too good if the US decided to fight piracy by itself. Politically and practically I think its better to have multiple countries involved, and I could care less who they are.

So you would have 0 problems with NK, veitnam, iran and china fighting piracy world wide ?

So you would have 0 problems with NK, veitnam, iran and china fighting piracy world wide ?

No I would not have nay problems with those countries securing known piracy hotspots, and I fail to see why you do.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
No I would not have nay problems with those countries securing known piracy hotspots, and I fail to see why you do.

So if there was a piracy hot spot off the coast of the USA you wouldnt mind them sending warships?