U.S. Navy to build $3 Billion Stealth Destroyer

[DallasEast]

Why we fought the British and at time using tactics that they saw as against the rules of engagement. It is war not a game. You don't get points for being good, it is life and death. I think US should abide by rules of engagement that are international agreed on until the enemy shows they are unwilling to give us that same treatment.

I am not so sure that Revolutionary War/War of 1812 military confrontations are very relevant today.

 

[Doomsday101]

I am not so sure that Revolutionary War/War of 1812 military confrontations are very relevant today.

All I'm saying is the Founders were who wrote the Constitution were willing to do what they had to do to free this nation. I'm all for international rules of engagement up to a point. If our troops are not being given that same treatment then sorry No quarter should be given in return.

I disagree when people say that makes us monsters, our guys fighting the Japanese during WWII learned quick the lengths the Japs would go to and in turn our troops became very ruthless towards them as well, hard not to when the enemy will open fire under a white flag or willing to tie a bomb to themselves to take out many of our men or fly a plane into a ship killing thousands. Only a fool would allow that and not counter with very brutal response

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Why we fought the British and at time using tactics that they saw as against the rules of engagement. It is war not a game. You don't get points for being good, it is life and death. I think US should abide by rules of engagement that are international agreed on until the enemy shows they are unwilling to give us that same treatment.

We are bound to the Geneva Convention Code...and because we agreed to those and it is a treaty we are bound and obligated by the constitution to follow those rules. Now that depends on who the enemy is but for the most part we are bound by the constitution to follow the geneva convention code since we agreed to sign it.

We can not go and justify going to attack a country because they are breaking international law and then break it ourselves along with our own constitution.

Now if you want to completely strip away the geneva convention code and remove the US from it completely...that is a different situation.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I am not so sure that Revolutionary War/War of 1812 military confrontations are very relevant today.

They are not because we were not constitutionally bound to follow the geneva convention code at that time.

 

[03EBZ06]

Not a fair fight?

We were vastly technically superior in every shape in viet nam, korea and afghanistan.

That was part of the main part I was talking about. Just because someone is vastly superior in technology does not mean an automatic win and be decision that would be coined not even close.

As far as rules. That is what should separate us from some of our perceived enemies...that what separates humans from monsters. We should be above their actions...if we do the atrocities that we claim they do and justify attacking them for..then we are no better than them if we sink to their level.

We signed up for the rules, we use them to go after people...if we don't want to play by the rules than we should just abandon them all together and not persecute or use that to justify going to war with others.

You pointed out results in Viet Nam, Korea and Middle East as an example of why we didn't beat them like a step child, if you can't see why it turned out like it did, then I don't know what to say.

If there is a war, one side cannot be restricted from it's capabilities and expect to win, even if they are better trained and technologically advanced.

 

[03EBZ06]

It's believed that NK has nuclear weapons. They said they've tested twice and twice earthquakes of 4+ have been recorded. I believe that if SK tried to annihilate NK, SK would eat a nuke.

No, They don't have any operable Nuke weapon, they are trying but haven't been successful.

Now, I'm sure they will eventually have an operable Nuke weapon, but as of today, no.

 

[DallasEast]

All I'm saying is the Founders were who wrote the Constitution were willing to do what they had to do to free this nation. I'm all for international rules of engagement up to a point. If our troops are not being given that same treatment then sorry No quarter should be given in return.

I disagree when people say that makes us monsters, our guys fighting the Japanese during WWII learned quick the lengths the Japs would go to and in turn our troops became very ruthless towards them as well, hard not to when the enemy will open fire under a white flag or willing to tie a bomb to themselves to take out many of our men or fly a plane into a ship killing thousands. Only a fool would allow that and not counter with very brutal response

I have no problem with that, but it does not offset the world we live in today. War is hell. No quarter should be taken, but consequences should not be devalued as well.

A North/South Korean conflict potentially brings a pretty heavy hitter in China to the table. Without question, the U.S. military can certainly dish it out. Yet, will the resolve of the American people remain unchanged if that conflict expands to our own shores UNconventionally? That's a consequence which cannot be summarily dismissed when discussing a nuclear war breaking out in Asia.

 

[YosemiteSam]

No, They don't have any operable Nuke weapon, they are trying but haven't been successful.

Now, I'm sure they will eventually have an operable Nuke weapon, but as of today, no.

They have tested two nuclear weapons. October 9, 2006, and May 25, 2009. Both were picked up by richter scales in surrounding countries.

 

[DallasEast]

They have tested two nuclear weapons. October 9, 2006, and May 25, 2009. Both were picked up by richter scales.

I think the main question is whether North Korea is near perfecting its missile delivery system.

 

[03EBZ06]

They have tested two nuclear weapons. October 9, 2006, and May 25, 2009. Both were picked up by richter scales in surrounding countries.

I understand that, but testing a nuke capability weapon isn't same as having an operable nuke and be able to launch of a nuke weapon is another thing.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I think the main question is whether North Korea is near perfecting its missile delivery system.

North Korea has ballistic missiles. Delivery of a nuclear warhead on top of one to an adjacent country probably isn't out of the question.

 

[kmp77]

I doubt a sub could get that close without todays ships picking it up and blowing it out of the water.

You might want to do some searches on the US navy during war games against diesel subs. They can get right under us with those. They're dang near 100% silent :/

Remember this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html

 

[DallasEast]

North Korea has ballistic missiles. Delivery of a nuclear warhead on top of one to an adjacent country probably isn't out of the question.

Granted, but having a regional/international rocket conveyance and an effective missile guidance system are two different animals. If you are determined to launch one, you better be sure its going to hit its intended target.

It wasn't that long ago when Saddam was lobbying scuds at Israel. All of them didn't reach their intended locations. I would be tickled pink if North Korea launched a nuke which fell back atop their own heads simply because they had not worked all the bugs out of their delivery system.

Well, I wouldn't be happy that Korean citizens got instantly microwaved, but a nuke's a nuke...

 

[Denim Chicken]

All I'm saying is the Founders were who wrote the Constitution were willing to do what they had to do to free this nation. I'm all for international rules of engagement up to a point. If our troops are not being given that same treatment then sorry No quarter should be given in return.

I disagree when people say that makes us monsters, our guys fighting the Japanese during WWII learned quick the lengths the Japs would go to and in turn our troops became very ruthless towards them as well, hard not to when the enemy will open fire under a white flag or willing to tie a bomb to themselves to take out many of our men or fly a plane into a ship killing thousands. Only a fool would allow that and not counter with very brutal response

So you were probably ok with our internment of Japanese citizen, right? Whatever it takes.

 

[RastaRocket]

Looks cool. What's $3 billion these days anyway?

All computer money and infinite debt that means nothing. :laugh1:

 

[RastaRocket]

So you were probably ok with our internment of Japanese citizen, right? Whatever it takes.

His post said nothing of that nature. He pointed to Pearl Harbor and the brutal fighting methods of the Japanese when we invaded in retaliation. He mentioned nothing about the Japanese in the US.

 

[Doomsday101]

We are bound to the Geneva Convention Code...and because we agreed to those and it is a treaty we are bound and obligated by the constitution to follow those rules. Now that depends on who the enemy is but for the most part we are bound by the constitution to follow the geneva convention code since we agreed to sign it.

We can not go and justify going to attack a country because they are breaking international law and then break it ourselves along with our own constitution.

Now if you want to completely strip away the geneva convention code and remove the US from it completely...that is a different situation.

Again it is not fun and game people lives are on the line. I think if the enemy will show no mercy I don't think we should be obligated to show any. In WWII for the most part Germany did abide by many of the rules as did we with Japan it became different because of the brutality of the attacks perpetrated by them.

If you know a guy waving a white flag will open fire on you after a while a smart man knows better than to believe it.

All I can say is yes I think there should be rules of engagement but all bets are off when the enemy no longer abides by those rules

 

[RastaRocket]

[youtube]6BfU-wMwL2U[/youtube]

 

[Doomsday101]

So you were probably ok with our internment of Japanese citizen, right? Whatever it takes.

Not at all, the interment was against US citizens not enemy combatants

 

[burmafrd]

Not at all, the interment was against US citizens not enemy combatants

denim must be one of those that are always ashamed.

Professional victim?