US aircraft carrier group deployed for ‘routine patrols’ in S. China Sea

[rcrmj]

China should fight Vietnam first to prove her combat experience like how America fought Iraq.

Then China can gain some real modern combat experience to face America.

Indeed you are quite experienced on fighting against AKM and YPG sandal militia with F-16s, F-18s, F-22s, ... good job. BTW, have they been defeated yet?

 

[hoangsa74]

Indeed you are quite experienced on fighting against AKM and YPG sandal militia with F-16s, F-18s, F-22s, ... good job. BTW, have they been defeated yet?

since you like to taunt America can only pick on sandal militia, how about you do something better than American by invading Vietnam and capturing Hanoi and Saigon? Vietnam sure is a better match for you than arab militia for American. at least Vietnam has su27/30, S-300, Spyder, SA-3 upgraded, portable launcher like the Igla-S, anti-ship missiles such as yakhont, kh-35, Klub-S and of course the ak-47.

 

[Viet]

China should fight Vietnam first to prove her combat experience like how America fought Iraq.

Then China can gain some real modern combat experience to face America.

Don't drag Vietnam into a serious discussion. We are not a training ground for the PLA boys. If the Chinese seek war, they can invade Korea, Japan or even Venezuela. We don't care.

 

[rcrmj]

since you like to taunt America can only pick on sandal militia, how about you do something better than American by invading Vietnam and capturing Hanoi and Saigon? Vietnam sure is a better match for you than arab militia for American. at least Vietnam has su27/30, S-300, Spyder, SA-3 upgraded, portable launcher like the Igla-S, anti-ship missiles such as yakhont, kh-35, Klub-S and of course the ak-47.

lol, we are not big fan of invading other countries with cocked excuse like American do

 

[antonius123]

You continues to shows that reading comprehension problem.

When I said: Let us take this statement:

That does not mean I ascribed any following statement to anyone.

Do you know the meaning of the word 'ascribe' ? Just in case you do not, here it is...

verb

1. attribute something to (a cause).

So I never attributed this statement 'China will militarily defeat the US.' to you, as in you said it.

This is why it is always fun to make fun of you because you cannot keep track of the debate.

LOL. Then what is your point - with that silly word gaming?

You are trully joker. Thats why people like to bash and make fun of you, only you dont realize it as you thought it was not you that they bash/make fun of

First of all, this is NOT MY CLAIM, this is an actual application used by indian army, US military and Immarsat

The proof is in the article itself, it's not my fault you are refusing to believe or read the article. it has detailed how that was done, you choose not to believe it and ask for more proof, yet, you have no detail how it is impossible to carry out the mission, instead you keep talking about how GPS work.

I Already bring everything I can on the table, while you dismiss them without due thinking, nor just because you refuse to believe. It has been used by the US Army in the Blue Force Tracker, should I break the confidential clause I sign with the US Military and tell you how Blue Force tracker works? You go to the DoD, apply for a TS/SCI clerance, then I can tell you.

As I said, believe it or not is up to you, I gave you 3 active life application as an example (Immarset, Blue Force Tracker, and CATROSAT). You not believe it, fine, that's up to you, I don't even want to ask you why or how you exactly detail the. I already gave proof. I don't need to do it again just because you not believing it or not read it.



I have no time to deal with little boy like you. All have been said and done and your question is addressed. You either give me a vaild counter argument on either Commerical Sat on Blue Force Tracker, or How India use CATROSAT to target insurgent is impossible, otherwise I will not be replying to you again.

@gambit may fine it fun to expose minimck like you, I found it time wasting. You don't know Jack about Satellite, You base all your argument based on your fanboyism view. I have start a thread here calling you on, you either go there and we will discuss with you in a PUBLIC Eyes where every sane member can see, or I have no intention to carry on an endless discussion with a smug like you here.

Come here and we will talk

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/hitting-your-target-part-1-how-istar-works.482129/#post-9273540

Otherwise, don't quote me ever again

So you can't answer / address my question at all?

If you can't address my question and argument, no need to repeat the same explanation. Those explanation of yours failed when you can't address my challenge.

What you bring in the table are simply absurd claims.

You back your claim with another claim when people is asking you evidence.

Your claim about inmarsat, 1000 telco satts that can render GPS for military, indian commercial satelite that capable to locate/guide weapon failed as you are never been able to explain or give evidence.

 

[jhungary]

LOL. Then what is your point - with that silly word gaming?

You are trully joker. Thats why people like to bash and make fun of you, only you dont realize it as you thought it was not you that they bash/make fun of




So you can't answer / address my question at all?

If you can't address my question and argument, no need to repeat the same explanation. Those explanation of yours failed when you can't address my challenge.

What you bring in the table are simply absurd claims.

You back your claim with another claim when people is asking you evidence.

Your claim about inmarsat, 1000 telco satts that can render GPS for military, indian commercial satelite that capable to locate/guide weapon failed as you are never been able to explain or give evidence.

As I said, I have explained, and provided examples (Not one, THREE) in this thread, doing more so, will be turning in a circle.

You, on the other hand, have not provided anything but your word, which worth this "..." much. I am not going to waste time on boy like you here, @gambit may have fun poking fun at you, again, I find it simply wasting my breathe and my time.

There is another thread out there I am dicussing the same problem with other member, you are welcome to join, and unless you are a scale little boy who are scare of being expose as a village idiot, you should join that thread IF YOU WANT TO CRUSH ME.Mind you, if you doing all these fanboy view, you ARE GOING TO BE RIDICULATE BY YOUR PEERS.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/hitting-your-target-part-1-how-istar-works.482129/

Otherwise, please do not quote me on this thread again. Thank you

 

[antonius123]

As I said, I have explained, and provided examples (Not one, THREE) in this thread, doing more so, will be turning in a circle.

You, on the other hand, have not provided anything but your word, which worth this "..." much. I am not going to waste time on boy like you here, @gambit may have fun poking fun at you, again, I find it simply wasting my breathe and my time.

There is another thread out there I am dicussing the same problem with other member, you are welcome to join, and unless you are a scale little boy who are scare of being expose as a village idiot, you should join that thread IF YOU WANT TO CRUSH ME.Mind you, if you doing all these fanboy view, you ARE GOING TO BE RIDICULATE BY YOUR PEERS.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/hitting-your-target-part-1-how-istar-works.482129/

Otherwise, please do not quote me on this thread again. Thank you

So it confirm that you are a boy in denial.

I refresh your memory: about one of the evidence I gave you before - without your ability to argue:

While a war today would be costly for the U.S., China’s increasing anti-access, area denial arsenal as well as its growing carrier capability and aircraft strength could make it impossible for the U.S. to establish military dominance and achieve a decisive victory in 2025, the report by the RAND Corporation says.
http://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/rand-report-war-with-china-us-loses-2025


Both belligerents have anti-satellite weapons that are nearly invulnerable to attack, meaning that both countries will be able to destroy a substantial portion of each other’s satellites. The destruction of the American satellite constellation would be especially problematic for the rest of the world since nearly all GPS units connect to American satellites.
http://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/rand-report-war-with-china-us-loses-2025

RAND said: The destruction of the American satellite constellation would be especially problematic for the rest of the world since nearly all GPS units connect to American satellites.

And what is your answer???

 

[rcrmj]

those two clowns been smashed mercilessly ````careful 123, they would give you a negative rating when they lose argument hoplessly

 

[gambit]

LOL. Then what is your point - with that silly word gaming?

You are trully joker. Thats why people like to bash and make fun of you, only you dont realize it as you thought it was not you that they bash/make fun of

It is called an 'example'. Surely you have heard of it ? It was an example of an unprovable claim, the kind you usually make in trying to look smart.

those two clowns been smashed mercilessly ````careful 123, they would give you a negative rating when they lose argument hoplessly

Say what ? The only thing he is doing, and he good at it, is running around in a circle like puppy chasing his own tail.

RAND said: The destruction of the American satellite constellation would be especially problematic for the rest of the world since nearly all GPS units connect to American satellites.

And what is your answer???

The answer is that RAND simply made a hypothetical scenario. There is no credible threat that China can destroy all American GPS satellites.

RAND can also say that the US can disable all China's launch facilities in the first day of the war. The problem for you is that such a scenario is far far less hypothetical than China can destroy all American GPS satellites. We have demonstrated several times over that US airpower can surprise, swift in approach, and devastating in result.

RAND can also say that the mysterious USAF space drone X-37B that have been in orbit for over a yr was designed to protect US satellites in the event of a war against a space going power. That is also a far far less hypothetical scenario than China destroys all American GPS satellites.

 

[jhungary]

The answer is that RAND simply made a hypothetical scenario. There is no credible threat that China can destroy all American GPS satellites.

RAND can also say that the US can disable all China's launch facilities in the first day of the war. The problem for you is that such a scenario is far far less hypothetical than China can destroy all American GPS satellites. We have demonstrated several times over that US airpower can surprise, swift in approach, and devastating in result.

RAND can also say that the mysterious USAF space drone X-37B that have been in orbit for over a yr was designed to protect US satellites in the event of a war against a space going power. That is also a far far less hypothetical scenario than China destroys all American GPS satellites.

RAND never said that, he is quoting Logan Nye (in case you forgot, it's the same guy from War is Boring who wrote the sensationalist piece about F-35, which have been debunked almost everywhere in the internet)

RAND report touches base about Chinese ASAT, that phase is what Logan Nye Said, not what RAND claim.

 

[gambit]

RAND never said that, he is quoting Logan Nye (in case you forgot, it's the same guy from War is Boring who wrote the sensationalist piece about F-35, which have been debunked almost everywhere in the internet)

RAND report touches base about Chinese ASAT, that phase is what Logan Nye Said, not what RAND claim.

Aahh..I do not take that place (not RAND) seriously anyway...

 

[jhungary]

Aahh..I do not take that place (not RAND) seriously anyway...

Well, RAND do have some good researcher, but in general, they usually multiply and amplify the threat.