Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 21 of 33 FirstFirst ... 111213141516171819202122232425262728293031 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 315 of 482

Thread: Argentinian Military

  1. #301
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    buenos aires argentina
    Posts
    223

    Default

    A carrier never go alone in a conflict. And aboard it have a lots of aircrafts.
    Don't compare the sea and the ground forces, because if in the sea don't have superiority, in the ground the battle will be dramatic.
    I think the navy must have a carrier, the coast of our country are vast,
    and always there are a menace around...

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    3,126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eagle
    Quote Originally Posted by Sturmtruppen
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagle
    Argentina doesn't have any serious military conflict nowadays, I'm not sure if it's ok to talk about "necessities", but if we aren't talking about the money, I would love to have an Armed Forces with the power that they had in March 1982, and more instead... talking about these:

    250 fighters and attack aircraft
    100 cargos
    20 or 30 combat helicopters
    10 heavy helicopters
    60 or 70 utilitary helicopters

    300 modern tanks

    1 aircraft carrier
    1 helicopter carrier
    8 destroyers
    10 corvettes
    6 submarines


    Why not?... but, talking about necessities... I am not sure if is so necessary, I think there are another things in a critical state that need to be improved before than the carrier.
    Yeah lad,we also need such things,but a Carrier wouldn't have more firepower than more or less the 300 modern tanks together!!!, i know it's expensive as shit,but with support and escorts,a carrier would be like an entire land force at the time of attack from the air to ground (i say air and not sea because the carrier uses the planes for attacking).

    of course what you have said is necesary,but comparing us to other latin american countries,it's obvious that we need a masterpiece,the chileans have an scorpene french sub,then,why we wouldn't have a fat,explosive,armed,stinky,bad and letal carrier? .

    Greetings

    ES

    A carrier more power than 300 tanks??!?!

    A carrier is not a cruiser, a carrier is not well-knew by its weapons. A single attack of four aircraft, each with two missiles type AM-39 Exocet II or the latest versions of the AGM-84 Harpoon would be enough to the sinking of the carrier, but is really difficult to destroy 300 tanks, don't you think?
    Lad, 300 tanks,which kind,sk-105? ,a carrier has aircraft,you cannot compare the anti-aicraft weapons of a tank that are crappy with a air to ground misile!,also it wouldn't be easy for tanks to destroy the planes.

    apart from that you can load aircrafts with powerful weapons,what has a tank?,a sabot? .
    a cruiser isn't good as a carrier,a plane in a carrier can load a nuke if it wants! .

    i know that 4 misiles can destroy the carrier,but a carrier has fighters and escorts defending it!!!

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    buenos aires argentina
    Posts
    223

    Default

    You have to situate in a hipotetic conflict
    Everybody's first attack is to the coast. And with 300 tanks can't defend
    all the coast.
    Once, a 300 tanks cannot do it, I know we have too the artillery, etc.
    But the problem always is the same. The sea.

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    3,126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cpl condor
    You have to situate in a hipotetic conflict
    Everybody's first attack is to the coast. And with 300 tanks can't defend
    all the coast.
    Once, a 300 tanks cannot do it, I know we have too the artillery, etc.
    But the problem always is the same. The sea.
    True words,also,Infantry win wars :wink:

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    buenos aires argentina
    Posts
    223

    Default

    The infantry is the "Queen of the battles"

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    3,126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cpl condor
    The infantry is the "Queen of the battles"

  7. #307
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    If you ever go up against a modern navy with modern submarines, this carrier of yours would sink faster than an extremely fast-sinking thing.

    Surely it will be better to spend the money on something/somethings which is/are less of a torpedo magnet?
    1884 electric cartridge. Look similar to anything?

  8. #308
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    3,857

    Default

    I would still like the question answered. Why have a carrier? Please explain what it would do if it wasnt there for a war with Chile or Brasil?

    You all keep forgetting that you have to support and pay for the damned thing (except Eagle).

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Watching from the shadows
    Posts
    276

    Default

    Aircraft carriers are for projecting military power outside the range of home based forces & are merely a liability in most defensive situations; the only exception I can think of was the use of Escort, or "Woolworths" Carriers in the Battle of the Atlantic.
    An enhanced air to air refuelling capability would better serve Argentina's needs.
    Things are going to get a whole lot worse from now on.......

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    Sorry but a carrier can not be compared to any number of tanks.

    A carrier would be a priority target for anyone attempting an invasion or defending their own territory. The idea that it is invulnerable is also flawed. Unless it well protected it is vulnerable, and always will be. Google "USS Cole" for some ideas....

    It is an expensive white elephant at the moment and the only thing it would probably do is either signal the invasion is imminent by suddenly changing course to the bottom of the sea or spend the war tied up because it can't be defended properly.

    New submarines on the other hand and/or new maritime patrol aircraft would sort out any problems of sea defence very well.

    Also you can not defend your coast with one carrier. You will need other assets as well. all of which will be drained of resources by this carrier.
    If you post idiocy, don't get upset if you are seen as an idiot.... I don't.

    Here endth the lesson.




    Have you seen any combat?

    Seen a little on TV.

    You talk the talk, but do you walk the walk?



  11. #311
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Cordoba-Argentina
    Posts
    6,392

    Default

    Well with the carrier or not I would put my money in aircraft, I think the Army is relatively well equpped by now.

    And talking about submarines here is some pics of SSK ARA Salta (modified U-209) under refurbishing. the data is early 2005.

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    3,126

    Default

    ,lad,our navy is equiped as shit,we cannot fight a single boat,even our air force is better.

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Cordoba-Argentina
    Posts
    6,392

    Default

    I say ARMY...not navy and relative ..you know.

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    3,126

    Default

    excuse me.

  15. #315
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    buenos aires argentina
    Posts
    223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panzerknacker
    Well with the carrier or not I would put my money in aircraft, I think the Army is relatively well equpped by now.

    And talking about submarines here is some pics of SSK ARA Salta (modified U-209) under refurbishing. the data is early 2005.

    I'm still question, what going to modernize then?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Feldgrau - German military
    By Dani in forum 2006 Archive Room
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-24-2006, 08:19 AM
  2. Your Military Experience
    By Orita in forum 2006 Archive Room
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 01-27-2006, 03:51 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •