Dostanuot Loj wrote:As the legitimate winner of the voting* I support and endorse this coup.
In my mind only.
You can't let your son win every time.
It'll be bad for his self-esteem in the long run.
Advertisement
by Imperializt Russia » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:32 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:As the legitimate winner of the voting* I support and endorse this coup.
In my mind only.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by The Kievan People » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:38 pm
by Dostanuot Loj » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:04 pm
by Western Weyard » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:06 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:His mother coddled him as a baby so he throws a tantrum if I don't now. You don't want to see a Leopard 2 throw a tantrum.
Mefpan wrote:I'd rather have them throw the region into shit zone than have Erdogan strap rocket boosters to his country and Wernher von Braun it there and damn the obstacles.
by Licana » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:07 pm
Puzikas wrote:Gulf War One was like Slapstick: The War. Except, you know, up to 40,000 people died.
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Never in all my years have I seen someone actually quote the dictionary and still get the definition wrong.
Senestrum wrote:How are KEPs cowardly? Surely the "real man" would in fact be the one firing giant rods of nuclear waste at speeds best described as "hilarious".
by Gallia- » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:24 pm
by The Soodean Imperium » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:27 pm
Heavonia wrote:Is it a solid thing for security services to have their own direct action troops rather than solely relying on military SF for wetwork?
by Korva » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:27 pm
by Gallia- » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:31 pm
The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Heavonia wrote:Is it a solid thing for security services to have their own direct action troops rather than solely relying on military SF for wetwork?
The CIA has its own paramilitary wing called the Special Activities Division (SAD) which in turn has a sub-unit called the Special Operations Group (SOG) which does all the secret boogeyman/black ops jazz. Basically DEVGRU/Delta +1.
by Spirit of Hope » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:02 pm
Gallia- wrote:The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:
The CIA has its own paramilitary wing called the Special Activities Division (SAD) which in turn has a sub-unit called the Special Operations Group (SOG) which does all the secret boogeyman/black ops jazz. Basically DEVGRU/Delta +1.
Like fuck up bin Laden's assassination more times than I have fingers?
Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!
by Dostanuot Loj » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:35 pm
The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Shonburg wrote:1. My nation has a long history of shipbuilding, and by popular support for the idea, we built it ourselves. The shipbuilding industry and Navy also wanted the experience.
2. What do you reccomend then? I chose the F14 because it was multirole...
3. What's the difference between the Sea Staillion, Sea King and Seahawk? I use the Hueys for ASW and S&R operations
The F-14B " bombcat" and F-14D Super Tomcat both have AtG capability.
Sea Stallion is a heavy lift helicopter. Sea king and Seahawk are much smaller and are utility/ASW helicopters.
by Gallia- » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:43 pm
by Puzikas » Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:58 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:I'm apparently Mr.No on these threads.
Sevvania wrote:I don't post much, but I am always here.
Usually waiting for Puz ;-;
by Shonburg » Wed Aug 03, 2016 10:30 pm
Gallia- wrote:>not using cvv
>using f-14
anti technocratic syndicalists strikes again
midway can use e-2, a-7, a-6, sea king [king of the sea], s-3 and f-18a/c this is all you need
since f-14 wasnt even conceived of while forest fire was being built (it was a-3 that was the big navy item) i dont see why you would need forest fire to use it at all
the modern midway is cvv not forest fire, that is a modern USS United States
by Husseinarti » Wed Aug 03, 2016 10:32 pm
by Meinkraft » Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:03 pm
Soldier wrote:And then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth. And then he hearded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one!
by New Axiom » Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:25 pm
Zakuvia wrote:If you aren't imagining a chain gang of adorable old retirees building a wall with Fixodent and using their Hoverounds as tow trucks then you're not the NS I remember.
by New Axiom » Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:27 pm
Meinkraft wrote:I've had an idea to create an aircraft carrier. This carrier shall be approximately double to thrice the size of the Independence-class aircraft carrier. Using a CATOBAR system, it will propel heavy and strategic bombers to lift off. On this vessel, the command tower is built into the side of the hull instead of being an actual tower, to allow for larger wingspans. Speaking of hulls, I intend for the hull to be a catamaran design. The ship is to have no weapons systems, but allows for a small onboard helo and countermeasures.
Now, I don't intend to launch B-52s off of this. I just want to use B-1 Lancers. It will not be a storage for the planes, but merely a stop point for restocking and refueling, before going for another strike.
Thoughts, threadmembers?
Zakuvia wrote:If you aren't imagining a chain gang of adorable old retirees building a wall with Fixodent and using their Hoverounds as tow trucks then you're not the NS I remember.
by The Kievan People » Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:41 pm
New Axiom wrote:Hey guys, is it smart to put cable cutter blades on submarines?
The United States gets its internet partly from undersea cables, and in some locations power is transferred this way. So why not put cable cutters on submarines?
by New Axiom » Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:49 pm
The Kievan People wrote:New Axiom wrote:Hey guys, is it smart to put cable cutter blades on submarines?
The United States gets its internet partly from undersea cables, and in some locations power is transferred this way. So why not put cable cutters on submarines?
Cutting submarine cables willy-nilly would degrade or cut off most of the internet.
But more importantly, why bother? It's really not much more than a nuisance.
Zakuvia wrote:If you aren't imagining a chain gang of adorable old retirees building a wall with Fixodent and using their Hoverounds as tow trucks then you're not the NS I remember.
by The Kievan People » Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:14 am
New Axiom wrote:Without access to the Internet, the majority of the general populace wouldn't be able to get news, therefore they would be completely cut off, which means you could invade unexpectedly. I mean, there'd still be radio and television but they still get most of their info from the Internet as well. Besides, the population would riot! They wouldn't be able to play nationstates and their account would be deleted!
by Velkanika » Thu Aug 04, 2016 1:22 am
The Kievan People wrote:FTR I am totes OK with this thread being closed and the reigns being passed to the duly elected authorities.
The Technocratic Syndicalists wrote:Heavonia wrote:Is it a solid thing for security services to have their own direct action troops rather than solely relying on military SF for wetwork?
The CIA has its own paramilitary wing called the Special Activities Division (SAD) which in turn has a sub-unit called the Special Operations Group (SOG) which does all the secret boogeyman/black ops jazz. Basically DEVGRU/Delta +1.
The necessity of a navy, in the restricted sense of the word, springs, therefore, from the existence of a peaceful shipping, and disappears with it, except in the case of a nation which has aggressive tendencies, and keeps up a navy merely as a branch of the military establishment. 1
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:52 am
Meinkraft wrote:I've had an idea to create an aircraft carrier. This carrier shall be approximately double to thrice the size of the Independence-class aircraft carrier. Using a CATOBAR system, it will propel heavy and strategic bombers to lift off. On this vessel, the command tower is built into the side of the hull instead of being an actual tower, to allow for larger wingspans. Speaking of hulls, I intend for the hull to be a catamaran design. The ship is to have no weapons systems, but allows for a small onboard helo and countermeasures.
Now, I don't intend to launch B-52s off of this. I just want to use B-1 Lancers. It will not be a storage for the planes, but merely a stop point for restocking and refueling, before going for another strike.
Thoughts, threadmembers?
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Crookfur » Thu Aug 04, 2016 4:07 am
Imperializt Russia wrote:Meinkraft wrote:I've had an idea to create an aircraft carrier. This carrier shall be approximately double to thrice the size of the Independence-class aircraft carrier. Using a CATOBAR system, it will propel heavy and strategic bombers to lift off. On this vessel, the command tower is built into the side of the hull instead of being an actual tower, to allow for larger wingspans. Speaking of hulls, I intend for the hull to be a catamaran design. The ship is to have no weapons systems, but allows for a small onboard helo and countermeasures.
Now, I don't intend to launch B-52s off of this. I just want to use B-1 Lancers. It will not be a storage for the planes, but merely a stop point for restocking and refueling, before going for another strike.
Thoughts, threadmembers?
Strategic bombers already have intercontinental capability. It's practically a defining feature.
What does putting them on a carrier achieve, except forcing you to design a super-heavy carrier concept to ferry them through ranges they could already fly combat operations?
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement