SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: bentway who wrote (362765)12/13/2007 9:39:28 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574849
 
"The British were shocked that the Argentines sunk two of their ships with Exocets, and that was 25 years ago. "

And in one case it was because the ship's point defenses saw the Exorcet and decided since it was a weapon from a NATO country, it didn't have to do anything.

"If the Iranians decided to sink every helpless tanker in the Gulf instead of the defended US Fleet, what then?"

Precisely. That has been the Iranian's announced strategy since the Revolution. And it is a good one. The problem is that the neocons have a touching faith in what our military can do. Now, true, it could be that the Iranians, in their zeal to collect on the promised virgin could neglect to move their launchers around and fail to take other precautions. But, those things only happen in video games when you set the AI to "easy"...



To: bentway who wrote (362765)12/21/2007 1:14:52 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 1574849
 
The British were shocked that the Argentines sunk two of their ships with Exocets

And despite that it would be reasonable to say the air and sea battle did not go well for Argentina.

And the British didn't have something like the Aegis system defending their ships, they didn't have long range carrier aviation, and they where outnumbered in the air. None of those things would be true in any possible air and sea conflict where the US faced Iran.