Chechnya is a Russian republic, and many Chechens are Muslim. There are Muslims in the 'Stans too; Dagestan is the first one that springs to mind.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Europe under extreme duress
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Yep. And there's been a war there that has spanned decades.
A new, well publicized RAND study calls our situation A New Medieval Age
Not just China but I believe the author includes Europe as well.
Not just China but I believe the author includes Europe as well.
- Weakening states: Governments will struggle to maintain legitimacy; ensure domestic security; and provide levels of goods, services, and opportunities their people expect.
- Fragmenting societies: National spirit will erode as competing group identities, such as sub- and transnational communities, gain traction.
- Imbalanced economies: Growth will be concentrated in a few sectors. Problems of entrenched inequality, stagnant social mobility, and illicit economies will worsen.
- Pervasive threats: The proliferation of dangers, such as natural disasters, infectious disease, and violent nonstate actors, will create a sense of permeating risk, even as the possibility of conflict with rival states persists.
- Informalization of warfare: Military forces will increasingly consist of professional troops augmented by contractors, mercenaries, and sympathetic armed groups such as militias. Older methods of fighting, such as intrastate conflicts, sieges, and irregular conflict, will be revived.
It's not a study... it's some guys at RAND prognosticating. I know this guy Frank who prognosticated about the end of history too.
I can't believe they didn't show them tapping the oil pressure gauge. Right there in the manual.
That is one long fam flight, sheesh
I like that they put the reporter with a young crew for the flight instead of some general. A good reminder that it's mostly young folk that are going to kill and be killed if deterrence and diplomacy fail.
I'm definitely Zeihan believer, but a few things he said in there rub me the wrong way. First, he keeps referring to the F-35B as the "carrier" variant. It isn't. It's the STOVL (VSTOL if you're into that acronym) variant. Second, if you don't have organic AIC (which they won't) then you don't have a true naval aviation strike blue water capability. Admittedly small but pet peeves nonetheless.
Interesting perspective. The vast majority of allied Navies refer to STOVL variant ships as aircraft carriers. We obviously make a distinction. Do you think AICs are going to be controlling the next fight at the distances required in the Pacific? What is your opinion on what makes a maritime strike capability?
I know the STOVL one is semantics and I'm sure I'm in the minority. It just annoys me. As to your first question. Maybe not controlling per se but certainly they'll play a critical role in both the strike missions as well as any counter targeting efforts. For the second, my issue is less with the maritime strike portions and more with the "blue water" and "naval aviation" parts. P8 and Tomahawk are both maritime strike but I wouldn't classify them as blue water (in the case of the P8) or naval aviation (in the case of the Tomahawk).
Ultimately what the Japanese are getting in Kaga is akin to the aviation arm of an ARG. Which is to say it is definitely a force multiplier but has significant limitations when compared to a fully equipped US carrier strike group. Not shitting on them as it is definitely a desirable and needed capability but Peter makes it seem as if the Japanese are going to be rolling around the SCS in a Ford-class carrier which just isn't true.
There are political/legal reasons why Japan and other countries do or don’t refer to certain ships as carriers, or helicopter destroyers, or whatever label they put on it. Some of it has to do with arms treaties and a nation’s internal governing laws on defense powers. Other ship label semantics could be for transit access to a certain port or strait governed by international treaty. The Brits and their admirers probably refer to the F-35B as a “carrier variant” because they call their HMS QE an aircraft carrier (the HMS QE-class do have organic AEW now, btw…it’s just a rotary wing AEW).
TL;DR: Semantics don’t really matter. Capabilities/intent matter more. ‘Merica still does it the best.
TL;DR: Semantics don’t really matter. Capabilities/intent matter more. ‘Merica still does it the best.