What's new

Is the US Navy too small to be effective?

I cant say anything against the US ARMY, bro @James Jaevid . Did i tell you my younger brother is a 1st year cadet at the USMA West Point, right? One of the few Japanese nationals studying there, actually.

Army Strong. :)


Ships and jets make good pictures gentlemen, but let me remind you guys that it is us in the Army that will be winning the war!!! Make no mistake about it!!! Lol!!! :chilli::chilli::chilli::chilli:

ARMY STRONG!!!!

@gambit sir, @Technogaianist , @Nihonjin1051 , @CENTCOM sir, your inputs will be very much appreciated!
 
Ships and jets make good pictures gentlemen, but let me remind you guys that it is us in the Army that will be winning the war!!!

The Navy's got this:

The-Story-of-a-U.S.-Marine-Corp-Conscientious-Objector-Ceremonial-Guard-at-The-Pentagon-700x465.jpg
 
Last edited:
:lol:

You'll fit right in with the Turkish section... boy has that gone down hill recently.

more fancy new System, the Price tag will go up. the numbers will go down.

US Navy and their western allies will meltdown in the coming century like a snowball in hell. chinese low Labor keeping broke USA-economy afloat. If China goes down, there is no USA economy anymore.
 
more fancy new System, the Price tag will go up. the numbers will go down.

US Navy and their western allies will meltdown in the coming century like a snowball in hell. chinese low Labor keeping broke USA-economy afloat. If China goes down, there is no USA economy anymore.

dude.. you are one heck of a stand up comedian!!! :enjoy:
 
Ships and jets make good pictures gentlemen, but let me remind you guys that it is us in the Army that will be winning the war!!! Make no mistake about it!!! Lol!!! :chilli::chilli::chilli::chilli:

ARMY STRONG!!!!

@gambit sir, @Technogaianist , @Nihonjin1051 , @CENTCOM sir, your inputs will be very much appreciated!
I am still a strong supporter of the Army, even though I am Air Force.

That said, think about this for a moment...

The advent of air power radically changed the calculus of how countries views each other. WW II was the first time naval fleets fought each other without seeing each other. Long range bombers and ballistic missiles replaced ground troops and navies as attack method in many cases and on a par as a threat in all cases. As far as the US goes, any country that pissed US off have to contend with both the USN and USAF as potential violator of its border, even if said country is on the other side of the world.

In the old days, winning a war really mean having ground forces in the defeated country in the amount that make resistance futile, and usually by that time, the country's cities, infrastructures, sea ports, and even farmlands have been touched by war. What else can the country do but capitulate to the victor ?

Forward from WW II to Viet Nam. During the Vietnam War, there were no US troops above the 17th parallel, meaning no regular troops. But US airpower was so overwhelming in presence and destructiveness that the North Vietnamese pled for 'peace negotiations' several times. All knew those 'negotiations' were nothing but respite from bombings for the North. Pleading for negotiations is not that far from capitulation. It maybe a deceit and the US had to stop for face value, that the US and South Viet Nam want peace, even though everyone knew the North Vietnamese would renege on any deal, but the North Vietnamese felt something dreadful enough that they were compelled to plead in order to have a rest period.

The day that airpower alone could determine the outcome of a war is not that fantastic. In fact, if the US is ever compelled to be callous enough and if a country is unfortunate enough to face US wrath, the USAF alone will be that is needed to beat an enemy into submission. It maybe funny, but it is not that difficult to envision a surrender via email with a Swiss server being the intermediary.

Finally, we never set foot on the Japanese home islands and Japan surrendered.
 
I am still a strong supporter of the Army, even though I am Air Force.

That said, think about this for a moment...

The advent of air power radically changed the calculus of how countries views each other. WW II was the first time naval fleets fought each other without seeing each other. Long range bombers and ballistic missiles replaced ground troops and navies as attack method in many cases and on a par as a threat in all cases. As far as the US goes, any country that pissed US off have to contend with both the USN and USAF as potential violator of its border, even if said country is on the other side of the world.

In the old days, winning a war really mean having ground forces in the defeated country in the amount that make resistance futile, and usually by that time, the country's cities, infrastructures, sea ports, and even farmlands have been touched by war. What else can the country do but capitulate to the victor ?

Forward from WW II to Viet Nam. During the Vietnam War, there were no US troops above the 17th parallel, meaning no regular troops. But US airpower was so overwhelming in presence and destructiveness that the North Vietnamese pled for 'peace negotiations' several times. All knew those 'negotiations' were nothing but respite from bombings for the North. Pleading for negotiations is not that far from capitulation. It maybe a deceit and the US had to stop for face value, that the US and South Viet Nam want peace, even though everyone knew the North Vietnamese would renege on any deal, but the North Vietnamese felt something dreadful enough that they were compelled to plead in order to have a rest period.

The day that airpower alone could determine the outcome of a war is not that fantastic. In fact, if the US is ever compelled to be callous enough and if a country is unfortunate enough to face US wrath, the USAF alone will be that is needed to beat an enemy into submission. It maybe funny, but it is not that difficult to envision a surrender via email with a Swiss server being the intermediary.

Finally, we never set foot on the Japanese home islands and Japan surrendered.
well @gambit sir, I rest my case!!!
 
u.s navy mother of all
u.s army mother of all
u.s airforce mother of all

u.s father of all nations.
(only for military wise)

1 u.s carrier group is enough to destroy some countries full navy.
 
u.s navy mother of all
u.s army mother of all
u.s airforce mother of all

u.s father of all nations.
(only for military wise)

1 u.s carrier group is enough to destroy some countries full navy.

1 US aircraft carrier could bring more than entire of Vietnam AF advance aircrafts.
1 Los Angeles class sub could bring more missiles than Vietnam missiles inventory
Counting 1 vs 1 is the most meaningless act.
-------------------
Nowaday people tends to think that Aegis class destroyers as defensive layer for American continent. Yes they are, but basically US Navy is perfect offensive force
USN has better airforce than most of other
USN has better missile/artillery than most of other
USN has better landing force than most of other
USN has better nuclear force than most of other
-------
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom