Comments by "1IbramGaunt" (@1IbramGaunt) on "HMS Queen Elizabeth Departs For CARRIER STRIKE GROUP 21 🚢" video.

  1. And just think, on board that ship there are large numbers of Royal Navy, Royal Air Force, Royal Marines AND United States Marines, all at the same time on the same ship, and there is a fully-stocked pub on board 😁
    62
  2. EIGHTEEN planes, and the rest is drones and helicopters, and there'll be more planes coming
    9
  3.  @stiffchocolate7546  the people who DID fight for it, which clearly you are not one of and never have been one of otherwise you'd know this, felt the same way! not out of patriotism but because Britain is and was their home and their families too
    6
  4. Yup, here's to The Mighty Hood and her crew. If there'd been more Q.E. class aircraft carriers built, one should definitely have been named after her
    5
  5. She left then came back again briefly
    4
  6.  @stiffchocolate7546  really, well thankyou for your service, IF that's true that is (frankly anyone can claim to be a veteran on the internet), but either way I stand by what I was saying before- fighting to defend this country isn't just some act of blind patriotism or some kind of gung-ho warmongering, it's fighting to defend those you care about, holding the line to defend all you hold dear sheltering behind it, to have the back of the men and women beside you doing the same, and of course ultimately to do that fighting and perhaps being wounded or dying yourself so others back home don't have to. Even disregarding all that though, all high-minded concepts aside, if you ARE in the British military it's also your duty and your JOB to do it at the end of the day though lol, there's no conscription, no draft, National Service in Britain ended in the 60's- these days the only way you ever will end up fighting for your country in the first place is if you signed up to do so, no-one tricked you or forced you (and let's face it the pay's nothing to write home about and the recruitment ads suck, so something else must have brought you there)
    3
  7. Hypersonic my arse
    3
  8.  @huzary1092  couldn't agree more, and those of us in the know accept we need that help and appreciate being given it 🙂 and well the same respect to you guys right back
    3
  9. Probably because it IS haha? That'll be one of the USMC jets aboard her
    2
  10.  @nigeh5326  oh no argument here; remember that the naming convention with these new QE-class carriers IS actually taken specifically from WW2 battleships though, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince Of Wales; and yeah I know Hood was technically a battlecruiser, but had she survived long enough to get that 1942 refit she'd basically have become a fast battleship herself at that point
    2
  11.  @stiffchocolate7546  no actually I HAVE done and seen a few things, as have four older generations of my family, and even if that wasn't true I can say whatever the hell I want when the hell I want thankyou very much
    2
  12.  @stiffchocolate7546  how does what you're saying there prove what I was saying wrong exactly, either?
    2
  13.  @stiffchocolate7546  yeah ok if that's the best response you can come up with then this conversation's over
    2
  14.  @huzary1092  damn right
    2
  15. You guys should build a carrier of your own and join in the fun haha 🙂 call it Graf Zeppelin, like the never-finished WW2 one was gonna be
    2
  16.  @noodles169  well we've seen missiles the Russians and Chinese claim ARE their Hypersonic ones, but never when actually being fired in anger haha. We'll see if they're all they're cracked up to be someday I guess
    2
  17. Perhaps she yet will 🙂 be a while before she does get to that neck of the woods
    2
  18.  @Chaddlee  yep
    2
  19.  @bobsit1945  I stand corrected! If they are aboard it'll be because those US Marines and their jets are though, and not because they're actually part of the ship's crew as such
    2
  20. They should've taken him along lol, he'd make a good life-raft haha
    2
  21.  @alexyoung7125  we're not 'saddled' with it, we have four submarines out of 11 equipped with it, and that's our sole active nuclear weapon!
    2
  22.  @alexyoung7125  well without nuclear weapons we lose not only our seat at the top-table as a first-line military power, but Nato also loses a big part of the overall nuclear deterrent to the Russians in that particular area of the world! and seeing as there's only the four "boomer" subs, since we'll never have more THAN four even when the future Dreadnought-class replaces the Vanguard's, and since we've plenty more conventional attack subs too and even the Vanguard's can fire conventional weapons instead if need be, I don't see why the RN just having those four particular boats is a problem! And yeah sure so we rely on the Americans for some elements of that nuclear capability, that's true of half the stuff we HAVE at this point and is true of plenty of other countries too these days, all nationalism or patriotism aside I don't see why that's a real issue either, not when they're our closest allies, and it's highly unlikely that's ever gonna change (and even if it DID I'm sure we could build, maintain & supply our own nukes if we had to, we HAVE in the past after all, it's just cheaper, simpler, quicker and more convenient to let the Yanks handle it for the moment though)
    2
  23.  @MetaView7  why?
    2
  24.  @ds1868  and two British destroyers, two British frigates, two British supply-ships, a British nuclear attack submarine and a British aircraft carrier. Along with 8 of the jets and all of the helicopters. Britain's KINDA giving the most important national contribution of the three there don't you think lol? It is a British Strike Group because the flagship is British, the majority of the ships and majority of the personell are British, and all but two of the commanding officers, including the commodore in charge of the whole strike-group, are British. The American and Dutch contributions may be very helpful and respectfully appreciated during this transitional period, but if need be we COULD have made this strike-group entirely British, just added an extra Type 45 and/or Type 23 instead and made do with less jets; and if it becomes necessary to in the future, we may well do so next time. The fact that the Americans and Dutch are helping us while we're still finding our feet with carrier operations again after over a decade without any IS appreciated and extremely useful, right now we DO need the help don't get me wrong, but that's all it is and it sure as hell doesn't mean they're calling the shots
    2
  25.  @ds1868  what I don't understand is why you can't simply give Britain the respect it's due here, nobody's claiming Britain's suddenly the single strongest unrivalled naval power on Earth again or anything thanks to our finally getting carrier capabilities back, we're just saying that because OF our getting that punch back, we're "back in the game", back to being ONE OF the strongest naval powers out there, and it's about time too; and as America's closest and most dependable ally you should be GLAD we are. And even back in the days of the old Empire, when Britain most certainly DID rule the waves, that supremacy wasn't unchallenged or unrivalled- or unaided
    2
  26.  @gabbertje-rh7rw  we need ALLIES to just as they need us the same way
    2
  27.  @MetaView7  because China is doing a lot more than "building bridges and railroads", especially in the South China Sea- their intentions are about as peaceful in that region as Hitler's were toward Europe, and we are going down there to help our allies put a stop to China's plans of conquest, by any means necessary, and to keep those international waters international
    2
  28.  @MetaView7  all we are going to the South China Sea to do in 2021 is join our allies there in attempting to stop China's territorial expansion, in particular into areas in that region that they claim but that no-one else recognises China's claim over, and helping keep an eye over Taiwan and the Phillipines especially; along with just paying lots of visits TO our various allies along the way and showing off our new ships a little, showing what Britain's capable of
    2
  29.  @MetaView7  naturally they've not docked at any of the places in question yet since as far as I know our CSG hasn't actually gone there yet?! And a visit to Australia isn't presently planned no but that doesn't mean they won't end up doing one, and again, plenty of fuel is being brought along
    2
  30. We shall see won't we
    2
  31.  @Bonzman  damn right!
    2
  32.  @ds1868  and 8 are British as are all 14 helicopters, and we literally just got carrier-capability back after decades without any, and the jets are brand-new as are the pilots, so that's actually frankly very impressive that there's already that many British ones aboard
    1
  33.  @MetaView7  the two supply ships in the strike-group filled to brimming with British-owned fuel seem to disagree lol
    1
  34. Only in terms of them being able to take the Falklands militarily lol (which arguably was already the case anyway what with the formidable garrison already on the islands); won't stop the Argies still laying claim to them regardless and trying to get them back diplomatically
    1
  35.  @arealbobbydazzler2520  along with keeping international waters international
    1
  36.  @timberwolf27  and there's 8 British jets and assorted British helicopters and drones on there too as such, yeah, with more to come in time. We ARE still finding our feet again in terms of carrier operations though right now and 8 planes obviously isn't really enough yet, so naturally the USMC jets are staying aboard for the time being to help make up the numbers
    1
  37.  @kkhagerty6315  agreed. Drachinifels has done a good 'what if' video about what would've happened had she actually survived the battle and finally HAD that refit though
    1
  38. Huh? They presumably already DO since there's a Dutch air-defence frigate sailing with the strike-group lol
    1
  39.  @MetaView7  if that counts as "stupid" apparently they are seeing as, again, there IS a Dutch warship sailing with the strike-group haha
    1
  40. Probably not this particular trip as it's the wrong direction, but she'll be in service for many years so I'm sure she'll pay a visit at some point 🙂
    1
  41.  @MetaView7  as I have already said several times fuel is not an issue
    1
  42. There's 8 ships in that Taskforce, not counting QE herself and the Astute-class nuclear submarine below; and OF those 8, 6 of the ships are British, and there's plenty more where those six came from and more new ones being added to THOSE as we speak. I'm not saying the forces haven't been neglected in the past, because they definitely have, could be argued the Army and RAF still ARE being neglected lol, but the Navy definitely no longer is being
    1
  43.  @Gerzzo  oh look, someone else who's either a Chinese troll or knows nothing about modern naval warfare (or both) who thinks Britain having aircraft carriers is a waste of money (despite the fact literally every other country that even remotely CAN afford carriers, and that has a navy remotely capable of using them? Either does have carriers too, is building them, is desperately trying to get into a state where they CAN build & operate carriers, has something LIKE an aircraft carrier they're trying to convert into one, or are trying to buy old carriers from someone who has them already)
    1
  44. We shall see how "useless" she is if a war breaks out again won't we
    1
  45.  @MetaView7  as good as any other because in-flight refueling is a thing? we have land-based long-range tanker aircraft and plenty of overseas bases all over the world, as do most of our allies, of which we also have many
    1
  46.  @davidbright8383  yup, RIP HMS Illustrious
    1
  47.  @bobsit1945  there are no US Navy personell aboard her I've heard about?! Certainly US Marines but not US Navy
    1
  48.  @David291  exactly, along with some of our own Royal Marines too
    1
  49.  @danielwhyatt3278  because there's USMC jets aboard her alongside our own, like the others said
    1
  50.  @bobsit1945  fair does, cool 🙂 British included I bet
    1
  51.  @ds1868  actually we definitely can sail under those circumstances, surely proven by the fact that's a British ship and it's y'know, sailing lol, and already was long before any of those Yanks turned up. And as long as the majority of the ships including the flagship, and SOME of the aircraft, are British? And if the strike group's under British command overall? It's a British sovereign strike group, whether a few of our allies happen to be contributing to it or not. Whenever a British ship happens to sail alongside an American carrier in an American strike group, or a British aircraft lands on an American ship, no-one tries to claim that doesn't make that strike group American anymore
    1
  52.  @davidknowles2491  who knows how well the Yanks will cope with it lol, but those are definitely British ships and British ships have had alcohol allowed aboard for centuries 🙂 the booze will only be of certain kinds and be strictly monitored and regulated mind, only so much per person and only at certain times, that kind of thing, but either way there IS definitely what amounts to a fully-stocked pub aboard alright
    1
  53.  @nimay13  damn right
    1
  54.  @mjor6406  and Britain actually INVENTED the things and has in fact been using them for longer than the US has lol? Including both cat & trap AND ramp type carriers? None of this size or with this level of technology of course though, and we've had no dedicated aircraft carriers at all for the past decade or so, so the Americans help IS needed getting back into the game, but it's also definitely not Britain's first rodeo
    1