Skip to comments.
Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers
U. S. Naval Institute ^
| 3/31/09
Posted on 03/31/2009 9:55:05 AM PDT by Evil Slayer
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-160 next last
To: dragnet2
I’m still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that we are extending preferential trade status to a country that is working on ways to militarily attack us.
41
posted on
03/31/2009 10:09:58 AM PDT
by
PapaBear3625
(The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money -- Thatcher)
To: cripplecreek
“Wonder how much of our tecnology we gave to them to make it for us.”
Substitute “The Clintons” for we.
42
posted on
03/31/2009 10:10:32 AM PDT
by
Cheetahcat
(Osamabama the Wright kind of Racist!)
To: sam_paine
It wouldn’t be necessary to use a nuke to take out the Three Gorges Dam; two or three well-placed cruise missiles with bunker-buster warheads would do the trick, I would think. Or we could fire 10 or more just to be sure...
To: Evil Slayer
Corrected link (not a secure website, http:// not https:// ):
http://www.usni.org/forthemedia/ChineseKillWeapon.asp
From the article:
“The Navy’s reaction is telling, because it essentially equals a radical change in direction based on information that has created a panic inside the bubble. For a major military service to panic due to a new weapon system, clearly a mission kill weapon system, either suggests the threat is legitimate or the leadership of the Navy is legitimately unqualified. There really aren’t many gray spaces in evaluating the reaction by the Navy
the data tends to support the legitimacy of the threat.”
44
posted on
03/31/2009 10:11:01 AM PDT
by
RebelTex
(Freedom is everyone's right, and everyone's responsibility.)
To: theFIRMbss
I’m thinking the Chinese would suffer a loss of millions of people a lot better than we would.
45
posted on
03/31/2009 10:11:21 AM PDT
by
nufsed
(Release the birth certificate, passport and school records.)
To: snarks_when_bored
Do they really think that we couldn't hit the Three Gorges Dam? Do you really believe the Teleprompter in Chief would give that order?
46
posted on
03/31/2009 10:11:56 AM PDT
by
thackney
(life is fragile, handle with prayer)
To: sionnsar
I’m pretty sure 0bama won’t be in office long enough to witness such a scenrio...unless he makes himself “President for Life”...
To: Evil Slayer
I thought the 3M-54 Klub (SS-N-27 Sizzler) was their ‘carrier killer.’
48
posted on
03/31/2009 10:12:54 AM PDT
by
Sax
To: snarks_when_bored
To: Evil Slayer
I thought the 3M-54 Klub (SS-N-27 Sizzler) was their ‘carrier killer.’
50
posted on
03/31/2009 10:12:56 AM PDT
by
Sax
To: agere_contra
Steerable mach 10 hypersonic missiles, yeah one of those would be a problem.So would a coordinated multi-pronged attack by General Zod and his malignant Krypton horde.
51
posted on
03/31/2009 10:13:08 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
To: Petronski
>It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes
>>Uh, sorry. I don't believe it
Maybe it's built on
left-over
Brilliant Pebbles development work.
If the "missile" just
has to
fall down from orbit
it can hit high speeds...
To: PapaBear3625
Im still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that we are extending preferential trade status to a country that is working on ways to militarily attack us.
Unfortunately you'll notice that people are desperately clinging to the fantasy that it all ended with the election of George Bush. The reality is that it continued and likely expanded over the past 8 years.
53
posted on
03/31/2009 10:16:58 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
To: Evil Slayer
Good thing Obama wants to kill missile defense. Since the only way to defeat a military the size of China’s is a nuclear exchange, we sure wouldn’t want to be able to survive it.
54
posted on
03/31/2009 10:16:58 AM PDT
by
Trod Upon
(Obama: Making the Carter malaise look good. Misery Index in 3...2...1)
To: liege
“I agree with you but one must remember who is the Commander in Chief these days. Would he have the guts to use a nuke?”
Given a continuous communization of the US and desecration of the Constitution, the possibility of a future military insurrection in the US is not out of the question, IMO.
To: nathanbedford
Mach 10? Probably not, unless it's still in the science fantasy stage of design. A ship-killing ballistic missile? Been there, done that. Somebody's doing some serious hyperventilating here, IMHO. If the Chinese weren't working on a long-range ballistic missile I'd be shocked.
To: MeanWestTexan
I do wonder if, perhaps with the exclusion of submarines, the days of naval warfare are coming to a close. Ships are just too big, too easy to find, and too slow. Will future wars be fought mainly in the air and space?
57
posted on
03/31/2009 10:20:06 AM PDT
by
kc8ukw
To: Non-Sequitur
A 2000 km range means at least an hour in flightAt mach 10 ?? 7 kmph?? hardly. They claim 12 minutes.
And we are converting Boomers to carry Seals and standard missiles. whoopy
58
posted on
03/31/2009 10:20:08 AM PDT
by
Vinnie
(You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Jihads You)
To: Evil Slayer
It is called a submarine.
59
posted on
03/31/2009 10:20:22 AM PDT
by
bmwcyle
(American voters can fix this world if they would just wake up.)
To: Evil Slayer
2 words for the chi-coms:
Arleigh Burke
2 more:
Standard Missile
We shot at, and hit, a freakin' junk satellite outside the atmosphere.
Is this new missile a threat? Of course.
Is it a threat that we cannot handle? Is it a game-changer? No.
And finally, one of the great quotes of all time:
ADM Arleigh Burke, 1991 (Regarding the USS Arleigh Burke)
This ship is built to fight. You had better know how.
60
posted on
03/31/2009 10:20:23 AM PDT
by
BlueNgold
(... Feed the tree!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-160 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson