Why Britain is Rotting

[Said1]

I'm honestly sorry to see the demise (decline?) of the Royal Navy, among other things.


Why England is rotting

England leads Europe in illiteracy, obesity, divorce, drug use, crime and STDs. Bloody hell

MARTIN NEWLAND | June 11, 2007 |

There used to be a time when taking on the Royal Navy was a bad idea. The force that policed the high seas through two world wars and protected the largest empire ever seen was for years the emblem of British national pride and pugnacity. Which is why it was particularly humiliating for many Britons to witness the spectacle of the navy's finest peddling stories about their capture a couple of months ago by the Iranian Republican Guard to the newspapers. The British had already watched televised "confessions" by servicemen, in which they criticized national foreign policy and admitted to crimes and trespasses they had not committed.

But it was the paid interviews given once safely home that left the nation wondering what has happened to traditional British reserve and the notion of the stiff upper lip. Leading Seaman Faye Turney told the nation of the sheer hell of being reduced to counting carpet tiles in solitary confinement while waiting to learn of her fate (Iranian prisons, one is led to believe, are carpeted). And the diminutive Operator Mechanic Arthur Batchelor complained to the media that the Republican Guard had taken away his iPod and called him Mr. Bean. :laugh2:

It was not long before commentators drew parallels between the behaviour of our fighting personnel and the collapse of traditional British values. The venerable right of centre newsmagazine The Spectator, in its editorial, said the episode "demonstrated just how deeply British society has been corrupted by the twin cults of celebrity and victimhood." These sentiments were echoed by the social commentator Theodore Dalrymple, who said the affair showed Britain "to be a country of very slight account, with a population increasingly unable to distinguish the trivial from the important and the virtual from the real, led by a man of the most frivolous earnestness who for many years has been given to gushes of cheap moral enthusiasm."

The Shatt al-Arab affair was, he contended, a sign of a desire by British leadership to be both "policeman and lady almoner, General Patton and Gandhi, Rambo and [prison reformer] Elizabeth Fry." Our servicemen are potential killers, and yet make good subjects for the chat-show couch. In striving to be both, they end up being neither.

Continued here: http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070611_106150_106150

[Guernicaa]

France should be rioting… (Actually I think I read someplace that they are)

Because of that new douche bag that probably cheated to take control of one of the best governments in the world...and also my ancestral country.

[MtnBiker]

France should be rioting… (Actually I think I read someplace that they are)

Because of that new douche bag that probably cheated to take control of one of the best governments in the world...and also my ancestral country.

So if a canidate wins that is not liberal it is assumed that they did so by cheating and it also is a license for rioting?

[nevadamedic]

I'm honestly sorry to see the demise (decline?) of the Royal Navy, among other things.



Continued here: http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070611_106150_106150

The Royal Navy is one of the most respected branches of the miliraty around the world. The have vessel's that the US could only dream of. They have stealth boats and are in the process of beilding a submarine that is more advanced then anything we are planning. Even when we launch the new high tech carrier CVN-78 in 2015 they will still be ahead of us. I just watched a documentary on the new carried on the military channel and it's going to be awesome. That is where I learned about the ships England has and are working on. It was either that episode or a submarine episode.

[Gaffer]

France should be rioting… (Actually I think I read someplace that they are)

Because of that new douche bag that probably cheated to take control of one of the best governments in the world...and also my ancestral country.

france has been rioting because of the douche bag that was in there. The new guy is quelling the riots. The socialism imposed by shitrack has finally worn thin in france. But he's off to some other country with the billions he got from saddam so he doesn't really care. Socialism pays, when your at the top.

[nevadamedic]

So if a canidate wins that is not liberal it is assumed that they did so by cheating and it also is a license for rioting?

That's the Michael Moore theroy.

A short review of his perhaps autobiographical Stupid White Men. Here we learn such shocking things as -- 200,000 Americans are dying of Mad Cow Disease and no one knows it; Bush secretly stole the election by having Florida bar convicted felons (which Moore maintains were great Gore supporters) from voting; Nader did the Demos a big favor by running in 2000; Enron is a great investment. Okay, Mike.

More on that here.........
http://www.mooreexposed.com/

[MtnBiker]

You already posted that, http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=81347&postcount=59

[glockmail]

France should be rioting… (Actually I think I read someplace that they are)

Because of that new douche bag that probably cheated to take control of one of the best governments in the world...and also my ancestral country.

I think you're the douche bag here.

[Said1]

France should be rioting… (Actually I think I read someplace that they are)

Because of that new douche bag that probably cheated to take control of one of the best governments in the world...and also my ancestral country.

At least their tied for STDs. :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

France should be rioting… (Actually I think I read someplace that they are)

Because of that new douche bag that probably cheated to take control of one of the best governments in the world...and also my ancestral country.

That explains soooooo much....

And isnt it typical. libs lose elections and the other guys cheated.

[nevadamedic]

You already posted that, http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=81347&postcount=59

Yea but it went with what was being said in here too with all the theroys of scams if Republicans win.

[badger]

The Royal Navy is one of the most respected branches of the miliraty around the world. The have vessel's that the US could only dream of. They have stealth boats and are in the process of beilding a submarine that is more advanced then anything we are planning. Even when we launch the new high tech carrier CVN-78 in 2015 they will still be ahead of us. I just watched a documentary on the new carried on the military channel and it's going to be awesome. That is where I learned about the ships England has and are working on. It was either that episode or a submarine episode.This is crazy. No one in his right mind would trade the ships of the US Navy for those of the Royal Navy. The USS Virginia class of nuclear attack submarines is the most capable in the world, now and for the foreseeable future. The aircraft carriers that are operated by the US have no equal. All British carriers (there are a total of two) need ski ramps to launch subsonic fighters. No British carriers, now or in the future, could launch a F-18 Hornet. A jet that can fly rings around anything that can be launched by a British carrier. The US Navy has 4000+ operational aircraft. In 2006, the Royal Navy had a total of 14 subs. Right this minute, the US Navy has 24 subs at sea, which is less than half of the force: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/navy_legacy_hr.asp?id=146. The Royal Navy has zero cruisers. The US Navy has 22 guided missile cruisers. The Royal Navy has a total of 3 amphibious warfare ships. The US Navy has 10 currently at sea. The Royal Navy is a pathetic shadow of its former self. In 1960 it had 202 ships. Today it has 82, and 55 of these are comparatively insignificant patrol craft, frigates, or mine counter measure ships. In contrast the US Navy has 277 ships, including 12 aircraft carriers (the Royal Navy has 2, both of which added together do not have the capability of one US carrier), 55 nuclear attack subs (compared to 10 for the Royal Navy), 18 ballistic missile subs (the Royal Navy has 4), 22 guide missile cruisers (the Royal Navy has zero), 56 guided missile destroyers (the Royal Navy has 8), and 30 frigates (the Royal Navy has 17). So NMedic, the Royal Navy has "vessels the US could only dream of?" Absurd.

[nevadamedic]

This is crazy. No one in his right mind would trade the ships of the US Navy for those of the Royal Navy. The USS Virginia class of nuclear attack submarines is the most capable in the world, now and for the foreseeable future. The aircraft carriers that are operated by the US have no equal. All British carriers (there are a total of two) need ski ramps to launch subsonic fighters. No British carriers, now or in the future, could launch a F-18 Hornet. A jet that can fly rings around anything that can be launched by a British carrier. The US Navy has 4000+ operational aircraft. In 2006, the Royal Navy had a total of 14 subs. Right this minute, the US Navy has 24 subs at sea, which is less than half of the force: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/navy_legacy_hr.asp?id=146. The Royal Navy has zero cruisers. The US Navy has 22 guided missile cruisers. The Royal Navy has a total of 3 amphibious warfare ships. The US Navy has 10 currently at sea. The Royal Navy is a pathetic shadow of its former self. In 1960 it had 202 ships. Today it has 82, and 55 of these are comparatively insignificant patrol craft, frigates, or mine counter measure ships. In contrast the US Navy has 277 ships, including 12 aircraft carriers (the Royal Navy has 2, both of which added together do not have the capability of one US carrier), 55 nuclear attack subs (compared to 10 for the Royal Navy), 18 ballistic missile subs (the Royal Navy has 4), 22 guide missile cruisers (the Royal Navy has zero), 56 guided missile destroyers (the Royal Navy has 8), and 30 frigates (the Royal Navy has 17). So NMedic, the Royal Navy has "vessels the US could only dream of?" Absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute_class_submarine The Royal Navy's new fleet of Subs. Not the best article. I think Pale Posted it before im asking him on here right now to post againg on here. Now the line of Stealth Boats that they have http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_StealthShips,,00.html were not even close to them there yet either. We may out number them my ships but some of theirs are better then ours hands down.

[KarlMarx]

france has been rioting because of the douche bag that was in there. The new guy is quelling the riots. The socialism imposed by shitrack has finally worn thin in france. But he's off to some other country with the billions he got from saddam so he doesn't really care. Socialism pays, when your at the top.

That's true, rioting has been going on since the spring of 2006. That's one thing the MSM does not want us to know about. The rioting has nothing to do with Sarkosy's election (except for right AFTER the election when the socialists decided that mayhem was preferable to popular mandate)

It's sad to see that some of the liberals on this board also have bought into the lie that rioting is preferable to accepting the outcome of popular mandate. It is sad because that is one of the reasons we have a democratic form of government to begin with, to ensure a smooth and peaceful transition of power when one side loses power because of the democratic process.

That's the way democracy works Obama08, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. I'm inclined to believe that your statements show your true colors and the sympathies of many who think as you do. More specifically popular mandate is fine, so long as your side wins, otherwise, rioting and temper tantrums are acceptable. That's the same method the Nazis used to get to power. They got in through the vote, but they used violence during the campaign. They used their brown shirts, who were nothing more than thugs, to intimidate voters to choose them, to convince candidates from the other side to quit the race.

Is that the kind of society you and your leftist brethren have in mind for the rest of us?

Shall we be subjected to rioting in this country if the Republicans win in 2008?

I'm going to have to buy a gun before the November 2008 elections, just in case a Republican wins.

[diuretic]

On the OP. I blame Thatcher. Seriously, I do.

[badger]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute_class_submarine The Royal Navy's new fleet of Subs. Not the best article. I think Pale Posted it before im asking him on here right now to post againg on here. Now the line of Stealth Boats that they have http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_StealthShips,,00.html were not even close to them there yet either. We may out number them my ships but some of theirs are better then ours hands down.The weapons load out on the USS Virginia class of submarine is similar to the Astute class, and if you could quantify the difference between the two in terms of sound emissions (stealth in subs), then you would probably be in jail. Your other link referenced the HMS Daring class of destroyer due to enter service this year, which has some stealth characteristics. However, if you want to talk about a real stealth ship with firepower, see the US Navy's DD(X) class of destroyers, which will enter service in 2011: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3724219.stm. There is no navy, including the Royal Navy, that has better technology or anywhere near the firepower of the US Navy. The DD(X) demonstrator: http://www.gizmag.com/go/4495/gallery/

[nevadamedic]

The weapons load out on the USS Virginia class of submarine is similar to the Astute class, and if you could quantify the difference between the two in terms of sound emissions (stealth in subs), then you would probably be in jail. Your other link referenced the HMS Daring class of destroyer due to enter service this year, which has some stealth characteristics. However, if you want to talk about a real stealth ship with firepower, see the US Navy's DD(X) class of destroyers, which will enter service in 2011: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3724219.stm. There is no navy, including the Royal Navy, that has better technology or anywhere near the firepower of the US Navy. The DD(X) demonstrator: http://www.gizmag.com/go/4495/gallery/

Im not talking firepower. We win on that by our size alone. But the Sub being built is the quietest Sub and has the technology to hear across the globe. I think when we launch the CVN-78 we will have the most advanced craft in service.

[badger]

Im not talking firepower. We win on that by our size alone. But the Sub being built is the quietest Sub and has the technology to hear across the globe. I think when we launch the CVN-78 we will have the most advanced craft in service.There is no sub that surpasses the USS Virginia; including sonar. And the Virginia exists now, whereas the Astute will not be commissioned for many months and is the first of only four boats. There will be 31 Virginia class subs, three of which have been launched: Virginia, Texas, and Hawaii. Give me a link that shows the Astute is superior to the Virginia.

http://www.usstexasbb35.com/USSVirgina-underconstruction-2003-Small.jpg

The USS Virginia under construction. See one of its sonar arrays at the bow. It also has sonar arrays built into the side of the boat.


Virginia's combat system suite satisfies a top-level requirement to counter multiple threats with a mission-essential-need statement that details a very effective set of acoustic sensors. The suite features two reel-able towed, linear sonar arrays, the TB-l6 and the thin-line TB-29. Just inside the thin-skinned acoustic window in the bow section of the outer hull is a very sophisticated, state-of-the-art active-passive spherical sonar array, the AN/BQQ-5E.

In addition, there are wide-aperture flank-mounted passive sonar arrays; a keel and fin-mounted high sonic frequency active sonar for under-the-ice ranging and maneuvering, and for mine detection and avoidance; a medium sonic frequency active sonar for target ranging; a sonar sensor for intercept of active-ranging signals from an attacking torpedo; and, a self- noise acoustic monitoring system.

Moreover, all acoustic systems have advanced signal processors and, where appropriate, algorithms are programmed for beam forming.

The Electronic System Measures suite features the AN/BRD-7F radio direction finder; the electronic signal monitors, AN/WLR-lH and AN/WLR-8(V2/6); the AN/WSQ-5 and AN/BLD-1 radio frequency intercept periscope-mounted devices; and the AN/WLQ-4(V1), AN/WLR-l0 and AN/BLQ-l0 radar warning devices. The AN/BPS-15A and BPS-16 are I and J-band navigational piloting radars, respectively, with each having separate wave-guides—one mounted inside a retractable mast and the other mounted inside a periscope.

Virginia has four 21-inch-diameter internally loaded torpedo tubes with storage cradles for a combination of an additional 22 torpedoes, missiles, mines, and 20-foot-long, 21-inch diameter Autonomous Underwater Vehicles.

In the free-flooding area between the outer and inner hulls, just aft of the bow-mounted AN/BQQ-5E spherical sonar array is Virginia’s Vertical Launch System, comprised of twelve externally loaded 21-inch diameter launch tubes for Tomahawk, the Sea-Launched-Cruise-Missile (SLCM).

http://www.aticourses.com/sub_virginia.htmSubs have been able to "hear" across the ocean for years. The most important thing is to be able to understand and classify what you are "hearing." That takes millions of lines of computer code, in this aspect of sub design the US Navy surpasses all competition.


The acoustic sensitivity of the U.S. Navy is so far beyond Russian capability that it is hardly even worth a comparison. But the real advances -- and exactly what these are remains highly classified.

http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=276658Do you really think the Royal Navy has sonar technology that the US Navy does not? Think again.