LaffyU.S. to send #nuclear submarines in new pledge to protect #SouthKorea from North's threats
HistoPol (#HP) 🏴 🇺🇸 🏴Having talked about gut feelings today:
A dismal idea. I will not only provoke the North Korean, but also the Chinese leader, who is probably still choking on the idea of the future delivery of #US #nuclear
#submarines to #Australia.
Subs seem to me the politically must inappropriate option. An aircraft carrier would have sent a very strong signal as well.
mochaandmuses 😈@HistoPol @GottaLaff It depends on the message. If you want to say, "We're right here" you send an Aircraft Carrier. If you want to send "We're here but you can't see us" then a submarine.
Pragmatically, The sub makes more sense as Aircraft carriers do not operate alone.To send an aircraft carrier means to send a naval battle group which can be at minimum 10 vessels plus support craft. That would be extremely provocative. With a submarine, it can operate on it's own from much longer, doesn't need support vessels and can be easily switched out for tours of duty.
Pragmatically, The sub makes more sense as Aircraft carriers do not operate alone.To send an aircraft carrier means to send a naval battle group which can be at minimum 10 vessels plus support craft. That would be extremely provocative. With a submarine, it can operate on it's own from much longer, doesn't need support vessels and can be easily switched out for tours of duty.
@itwasntme223
Thanks for this introspective.
I am not a naval strategist.
Alas (or fortunately;)), I do not know Kim Jong-il.
What is more threatening?--A threat that you can see or one that you cannot see and that you can never be sure about where exactly it is?
One thing is sure, a nuclear submarine with its "almost unlimited" energy supply can strike anywhere at any time (within the corresponding missile range...
... An #aircraft #carrier would need to be moved into position openly, in contrast.
Now, of course, an aircraft carrier has a lot more #firepower (unless #nuclear #missiles are used) than a small #submarine. However, if I were Kim, I'd deal more easily with the visible than with the invisible enemy, larger provocation or not.
Let's hope I am wrong, though, and that #Xi in particular will not use the sub as a pretext to increase the heat on #Taiwan, which is what...,
Andrew Bennett@HistoPol @itwasntme223 @GottaLaff
These are nuclear ballistic missile submarines, which have but one purpose: launching nuclear weapons. And that is the point.
Occasionally docking Trident missile boats in South Korea is nuclear signaling. The South is currently considering making their own nuclear weapons to deter the North. The US would very much like to forestall this, so we are doing everything we can to reassure them that US nukes are sufficient to deter any North Korean nuclear attack.
"The Second Cold War has begun."
I have been thinking this for some years now.
Since last year, my fear is that it will not remain cold.
Alas, I have to agree with your "armored divisions" statement.
To summarize Plato, Shi Ji, and Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus:
"Si vis pacem, para bellum" ("If you want peace, prepare for war").
Because as the grand master of all said about 2,500 years ago:
"In peace prepare for war,...
@itwasntme223 @GottaLaff
@larthallor @itwasntme223 @GottaLaff
... in #war prepare for #peace
The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin.
Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected."