Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I think he means PRC, my fellow white sheet.
Does anybody remember the rocket launch.....
- Thread starter nitro harley
- Start date
echelon1k1
New Member
Programmable logic control... Robots...
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
the dod has NEVER claimed the chines have a nuclear powered sub, not even one. the chinese claim this now and again, but they also claim to have fleets of dolphins at their command to battle pirates
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1169916/Chinese-ship-saved-pirate-attack-pod-dolphins-ANOTHER-American-ship-comes-rocket-fire.html
paper will lay still and let you put anything on it.
all your protestations of "clearance" and above top secret knowledge not granted to the rest of us lowly mortals is just useless puffery.
you might as well claim to be a british 00 agent with a license to kill, or a top tier CIA operative with a multi-billion dollar black budget.
every time you start spouting your mil/intel opsec bullshit it starts to get awfully munchhauseny in here.
if you think china has nuclear powered subs then your cracked. IF they had em, they would have bought them from the russians, but they dont, they didnt and they arent anywhere near building their own yet.
the chinese wont build a nuclear sub till they are certain it will work perfectly. thats how they roll. they may be working on a design, but they're not even ready to start laying the keel.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
in that context your statement makes no sense.
if the US and ??? "some robots" ??? and the nations of asia were facing a serious threat, why would they launch a fizzler from point mugu naval weapons station?
asia is 3000 miles from the la metroplex, and the rocket trail was pointed the wrong direction.
also, ROBOTS??? really???
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
*Lepubric. cn
echelon1k1
New Member
another long winded masterbatory rant from mccarthys right wing testicle...
please continue to think you're as good or better informed than the DOD on these issues.
China has ICBMs and you don't need to be 007 or leiter to know this, but you DO NEED to be a redneck not to understand this - US Air Force Air and Space Intelligence Center, Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threats 2009
Didn't mccarthy teach you that chinas full of commie bastards too, you should be very well "red" on the subject...
enjoy the Grand Old Poof party...
echelon1k1
New Member
you dont get anything for pointing out the stark fucking obvious...
nice try on a typo though glad to see your life is that pointless...
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
china has icbms of unproven utility with shitty guidance systems.
whats your point?
and if you think thats long winded then you should go back to twatter.
too many words make your head hurt?
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
what the fuck are you on about now?
what typo? what "nice try"?
youre the one who when asked "whats PLC" started talking about robots.
i figured you probably meant the PRC, but i can never tell with your acronymyilitis, so i asked for clarification.
dont get pissy because you made a typo, and failed miserably when given EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT IT.
so were you talking about the People's Republic of China or goddamned fucking imaginary robots you silly twat?
even in the context of the Peoples republic Of China your comment still makes no sense.
if the US and the chinese are facing some serious threat why do you presume they would launch a fizzler from popint mugu naval weapons station, and why would the other asian nations be involved if they were launching a rocket near LA?
or is my clearance not high enough for you to explain this flight of fancy.
echelon1k1
New Member
no it just where's the point and how do I get to it, without running into your ignorance, which is almost impossible when youre posting and/or talking
echelon1k1
New Member
Notice the LIKE... you dimwitted imbred farmless redneck... stupids like you are an easy target, your gubmint thinks so too... hence being farmless
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
and yet you felt the need to start gabbling about robots.
i dont give two squirts of piss what you like, youre still a snotty little twat who claims his education to be supreme, his erudition immaculate and his military intelligence clearance is beyond top secret.
if you think the chinese have nuclear powered subs, and accurate icbms capable of reliably hitting anything outside of the bo hai sea, then it's not too much of a stretch for you to start believing in some mythical robot nation under the sea between japan and hawaii.
hell that wont even be as wacky as your views on israel and the pallies, so why the fuck not?
this still does not explain why the US and china would be facing som "serious threat" (presumably from a third party, possibly robots?) which would result in the launching of a wobbly off target missile from point mugu. thats still just retarded.
echelon1k1
New Member
I've addressed the above errors already, even though you're quite sure it's THIS MANY ZERO'S!!! So you get a ZERO.... retard....
you need to lighten up man take a joke, maybe a toke too.... PLC was a TYPO, canna picked it up pretty quick though...
You're way to easily distracted but that's the good thing about dumbasses, they take the bait, no matter what... Senility will be an easy transition for you as you're mostly there already. Just like israel the good mindless republifuck in you loves to exaggerate and distort, obfuscate and deny, simple facts in plain view english. I'm sure you could imply anything if you really put half that redneck brain of yours to work... That's why elementary school is important...
Who know's why it was launched, my speculation is as good as yours just without the masterbatory wall of pointless text that companies your pathetic and sad posts...
its the thought of more people like you in the white house that stops your party from getting another 8 year shit stain on your beloved country
*half a point for accuracy
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
blah blah blah. china still has ZERO nuclear powered subs which can be confirmed by any organization not run by the chinese politburo.
the chinese may claim they have a nuclear sub, but they still do not.
back in the 80's the russians claimed they have hundreds of thousands of tanks on the polish border when in fact they only had a few hundred obsolete broken down hoopty ass beaters with no fuel reserves and limited ammunition.
north korea claims they have sucessfully cloned humans, and kim jong il shot 8 holes in one on his first ever try at golf.
cuba claims they are a worker's paradise despite the incredible risks cubans still take to escape that shitty little island (which is only shitty because america wont trade with them)
mexico claims to be the most magnificent nation on earth, despite the numerous mexicans who walk across the trackless mojave to take jobs cleaning toilets and picking lettuce (but mexico is oppressed because america DOES trade with them???)
if you believe everything you hear in a press release from a shithole country with a government controlled press then your as gullible as any lefty halfwit would-be Libertarian Socilaist (who invariably cannot explain what that phrase means...)
china doesnt have a single nuclear powered sub, and their claims of having subs capable of fitting nuclear weapons are dubious.
your speculative and idiotic claims about that rocket plume are retarded.
point 1) 4 godamned military weapons testing facilities within 50 miles of that spot.
point 2) no bricks shat in strategic air command
point 3) no bricks shat in the pentagon
point 4) no saber rattling with china
point 5) not even any claims of responsibility by china because only a fool would believe such claims, and the event would be useless for internal consumption in china.
result: it was a failed missile test, which resulted in an errant rocket straying close to the la metroplex, not a show of force from an imaginary chinese sub.
you want to sound like you know some shit that we mere mortals are denied, so you can feel special, but your claims are just stupid. and nobody believes that a former member of the australian army catering corps has the inside track on the military intelligence briefings in the bowels of the pentagon.
echelon1k1
New Member
TL;CBF please keep dazzling us with your bullshit and ignorance you half witted imbred... Granpappy didn't teach you how to STFU?
Keep wanking on with you uninformed pointless walls of text - REPUBLI-CUNT
You ARE WRONG again, the truth hurts and you're still farmless....
Karma is a bitch! No go bitch to your daddy mccarthy...
Make it and post on YouTube if it is so easy.
echelon1k1
New Member
China Naval Modernization: Implications for
U.S. Navy CapabilitiesBackground and
Issues for Congress
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/10/two_more_chinese_ssbns_spotted.php
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/07/new_chinese_ballistic_missile.php
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/type_94.htm
Note: the two fas links are from '07.
The "TWO YEAR" term is an estimation not in regards to nuclear subs, but instead the "nuclear triad" which the it's new missiles & subs will complete.
China submarines to soon carry nukes, draft U.S. report says
I could find some wiki links if you'd like?
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
funny, half the reoprts i see call the Jin class, or type 94 subs DIESEL, and half call them nuclear powered. all agree they are fitted with short range ballistic missiles (NOT icbms) and those missiles are NOT nuclear capable due to the primitive state of chinese warhead miniaturization programs.
the type 93, or Shang class suffers from the same contradictions, in some sources being called Diesels, and in others nuclear.
when dealing with chinese claims ill always err on the side of them NOT having the new shit, since they cant even make convincing knockoff levis.
ill take Janes' opinion over "global security dot org", and Janes reports china is still buying Kilo class diesels from russia which makes me doubt the claims of the links you provided.
but thanks for actually backing up one of your claims. ill take this information under review.
china MAY now have a couple nuclear powered subs, but they still have no subs armed with icbms, and no subs armed with nuclear weapons.
all sources i see agree on that score, so thats 1 possible correct assertion leaving 2 more outstanding.