Comments by "Hyok Kim" (@hyokkim7726) on "Where is America's Stealth Destroyer?" video.
-
5
-
4
-
@chris8612 ''2 trillion plus for 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not much we got in return. ''
I commend you for being forthright on those money pits.
''80 billion for Ukraine while our troop aren't in the firing line, while trashing insane amounts of if Russia equipment. This is not even remotely comparable.''
80 billion is not the final investment. Janet Yellen said U.S. was going to be with Ukraine as long as it takes. Russian Federation is far stronger than those pseudo-religious nutjobs.
U.S. with boots on the ground, for more than a decade with all those resources couldn't defeat them; what make you think Zelensky and the corrupt Ukraine government could do what U.S. couldn't do.
Given U.S. was going to support them for the next 20 years, it would be about 2 trillion again.
''Even if you don't care about helping Ukraine, ....''
Do you know how many Ukrainians have died? Why do you think we should care about Ukraine?
''the amount of money for USA companies and tax revenue to be made is staggering.''
For MIC, and who foots the bill, U.S. taxpayers? It's the money that could have been used for infrastructure, the wall, for example, R&D for semi-conductors, or more pressing military needs, such as Space defense, SLBMs, decommissioning silo-based ICBMs, lasers, hypersonic missiles.
''Already the USA military complex has increased sales by 50%.''
....and that's the money that has come from U.S. taxpayers, what about their needs?
''Factories for mil hardware are already being built by top defense companies in Western Ukraine.''
For the benefit of MIC, and the locals, not U.S. taxpayers.
''
''It's not like Afghanistan where the biggest export is poppy for heroin.''
Again, I commend you for being forthright; too bad, Bush Jr. and the NeoCon gang didn't talk about that when U.S. invaded Afghanistan.
''It has massive mineral deposits, the biggest and best agricultural lands in Europe.''
Yes, and it will belong to Russian Federation.
''The country will have to be rebuilt, China won't get the contracts it will be the USA and European companies.''
You're putting the cart before the horse; it will be Russian companies and others such as ROK will get the contract. Not U.S. or the West.
''They are also saving us money, since much of the systems sent were near the end of their shelf life, the USA tax payers would have to pay for decommissioning old stocks.''
...but neither U.S. nor the rest of the West have built more modern, replacement yet. Soon, we're going to be running out of the old stock; are you implying that U.S. should give Ukraine the latest and most advanced weapons when that happens? Don't you think some of those could be captured by the Russians to examine, the strength and weakness, so that they could engineer better weapons to be used against the West?
''Most of the stuff sent was payed for in the 80s and 90s. It's not like we handed them a blank check for 80 billion dollars too what they want with.''
There is no accounting of what happened to the aid package, much of which could have been sold to black market; Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
How long do you think U.S. should keep pissing the resources into this money pit?
3
-
2
-
2
-
Big guns vs. More Missiles
Sounds like battleships vs. aircraft carriers back in the day long before WW2.
Hadn't the senior USN officers even cheated their own tests and court martial Billy Mitchell to defend their favorite toys?
So much for experience and wisdom. Cappy is being too kind on this one: This should have been no brainer! Thank goodness, at least ROKN Senior leadership didn't even think of building a battleship. Subs were to be the foundation of the ROKN by that point.
However, ROK MC had made the same mistake that USMC has made, that I think is now being corrected by ROKN. ROK MC is not to have the light carriers of their own, with fixed wing stealth planes. No more F-35B that were planned to be purchased, instead ROKN is going to have a medium aircraft carrier with the naval version of KF-21, KF-21N. There is no reason why MC should have fixed wing stealth planes for CAS during amphibious assault: Apache is good enough. Especially when F-35B is the least effective of the three for air superiority, CAS, the most expensive, and the least reliable of the A, B, C.
It's not the mission of USMC to contest air superiority: That is the mission for USAF/USN Aviation.
Too bad Boorda committed suicide. Especially when Zumwaldt himself had authorized it to many others as well in public. I agree with Boorda, and so does ROKN; they are going to build at least one to as many as 3 arsenal ships by late 20s. Missile per missile, it's about the cost of as low as 0.24% of Zumwaldt, and yes, those missile can be, and should be launched as many, asap, as possible, with no bottlenecks.
If hypersonic missile is the future, then arsenal ship should be no brainer. Arsenal ships can be eventually even become unmanned, even autonomous. Cheap, optimally effective, optimally efficient, with low maintenance, and very little risk to human crew, less need for pilots, maintenance crew, and the planes, what's not to like?
Not good for MIC, though, since they wouldn't have the fat profit margin, and not good for career USN officers, either, since the minimum need for personnel to operate arsenal ships.
As for stealth design for the littoral combat ship purpose, for close in shore bombardment, wouldn't it be vulnerable to enemy artillery bombardment as well as the enemy CAS, cruise missile strike?
There's a saying, ''Ship is a fool to fight the fort.'' Of course, with air supremacy, this would not be as much of an issue. Still, the risk is there; why risk a very expensive hardware when you don't have to. With air supremacy, not much need for the stealth design. Without air supremacy, stealth design wouldn't do much good.
There's a reason why the Egyptian navy adopted K9.
Egyptian Navy to get K9 howitzers.
Could X-band radar detect hypersonic stealth missile in time to take defensive measure?
Could AN/SQS 60 detect the supercavitating torpedo in time for defensive measures, at least the Russian version, VA-111 Shkval?
Report: South Korea Is Developing a Super Torpedo That Could Attack at 200 Knots
ROK version is going to be more advanced than the Russian version; it will be quieter, till it gets to its 'No Miss' zone, longer ranged (electric, with variable speed), and smarter (it would maneuver and track the target with sonar stealth coating, and sonar of its own)
Btw. USN stopped the development of AN/SQS 62 and adopted Thales sonar instead, due to the reliability problem; does AN/SQS 60 suffer the similar problem?
ROKN subs have been very successful in RIMPAC.
Yes, hypersonic missiles are the future, especially hypersonic cruise missiles. With the advances in sensors from satellites, especially ground penetrating radars, the enemy silo-based ICBMs and even SLBMs could be located/targeted, and neutralized. Hypersonic cruise missiles could be used to disable the enemy ICBMs and SLBMs, and hypersonic gliding missiles could be used to finish/detonate the disabled, but still in tact ICBMs and SLBMs, or the enemy surrenders, whichever is sooner.
I don't think the hypersonic missiles for Zumwaldt are hypersonic cruise missiles, but hypersonic gliding missiles.
Still, arsenal ships would provide far better bang for the buck, up to 500 hypersonic missiles for the price of about 500 million vs. 12 hypersonic missiles for Zumwaldt, for the price of about 5 billion, and no human crew vs. up to 148 crew?
1