OT What does a Tomohawk missile cost?

[Tony Hwang]

With good disgestive function.

[Kurt Ullman]

What they spent on food wouldn't effect their tax bracket. Except to the extent they would have saved and judiciously invested the difference.

[Jim Yanik]

G. Morgan wrote in news: [e-mail]:

says $569,000 each. it doesn't say if that includes warhead. I doubt it. a nuke WH(TLAM-N) would substantially raise the cost. I don't believe the conventional WH is going to cost $831K,more than the Tomahawk itself.

You don't risk a pilot.... but you usually get the piloted aircraft back and can reuse it. and you can attack multiple targets,and targets of opportunity.

TLAM is good for high-risk targets.

[trader4]

So how many high tech wonders of the world origninated and are based in the "UK? Intel? Microsoft? Cisco? AMD? Boeing? IBM? Dell? HP? Do you even have one company that produces computer chips that is British? Notice I said produces, so that leaves out ARM, which is just a modest design firm. There is one huge UK semicondutor plant, owned and operated by Intel, a US company, in Ireland.

Unbelievable that you keep bringing this up, after all the times you've made an ass of yourself. Anything else I can help you out with?

You could be fixed tomorrow too. Hope you get your head cracked at your next leftist riot over there.

[trader4]

- Hide quoted text -

Gee harry, if the Britts are so damn smart, why can't they even stay in the candy business?

[gfretwell]

High fat, high carb food is cheaper.

[K. Lance]

Try eBay or Craig's List, I've seen them on there for half the cost.

[aemeijers]

I'm a simple man with simple needs. A single million would do me easily, for the maybe 30 years I have left.

[Robert Green]

That's not as funny as you think. If China for any reason had to go to war, they have tremendous manufacturing capacity (as we had in WWII) to make weapons. Right now they're making anti-ship missiles and special "carrier killer" torpedoes in amounts that are essentially indefensible against. They're able to do it using former Soviet weapons designers and because they have mass manufacturing know-how (they got from us!) and cheap labor. Our military may not be ready to face a force that can seriously hurt it - we've been up to our necks fighting goat-herders and suicide bombers, not a credible national military force. Especially one that wants to prove it deserves a place at the table of world powers. Taiwan is where you can expect WWIII to start, and if we open up any more SOLIC's like Libya, they may feel the time may never be better to assert control over Taiwan by military force.

-- Bobby G.

[Ralph Mowery]

I am saving my boxtops for one. Either that or order one from China.

[krw]

I see the clueless Brit is back from his riots.

[krw]

Why do you believe the US government is should get paid a dime on money made elsewhere that has already been taxed where it was earned?

[Jim Yanik]

" [e-mail]" wrote in news: [e-mail]:

I bet Comrade Obama and all his rich pals hide their money where they don't have to pay a lot of taxes on it. Trusts,offshore accounts,other dodges. Heck,half of Comrade Obama's advisors didn't even pay their taxes.

[Jim Yanik]

"Ralph Mowery" wrote in news:d6udnewOqY1I4w_QnZ2dnUVZ [e-mail]:

first they have to FIND the carriers,(the sea is a very large place) then get through the AEGIS ships. Silkworms are OLD tech,easy to defeat. the Sunburn's are faster and harder to defeat,but still doable.

[krw]

That's not the point of a carrier.

Yes, we could make eight or ten Shermans for every tank the Germans could make.

China and the USSR weren't exactly best buddies, at the time.

[krw]

How much in back taxes do federal employees owe?

[Ralph Mowery]

I agree. China has the population and could crank out lots of war materials if they need to.

If it really comes to WW3 our carrirers will not be worth much. A nuke exploded within a couple of miles will take them out. What does China call their anti ship missle, a Silkworm ? Anyway if they launch 6 or 8 at a time,the carrier does not stand much chance even without a nuke. That is what hapened to Germany in ww2. They had a superior tank, but the US would send 5 of the Shermans after one. Usually lost 3 or 4 to get each German tank. I think part of the Vietnam problem was we did not really want China to get involved and that was close to 40 years ago.

[Robert Green]

Precisely. The battles are won by the side that can take the biggest hits and still fight. That was us in 1945 and it's China in 2011. They might even come out ahead with a forced population reduction. The Silkworm is really old technology compared to these:

"The speed of the VA-111 far exceeds that of any standard torpedo currently fielded by NATO. This speed is a result of supercavitation: the torpedo is, in effect, flying in a gas bubble created by outward deflection of water by its specially shaped nose cone and the expansion of gases from its engine. By keeping water from coming into contact with the surface of the body of the torpedo, drag is significantly reduced, allowing extremely high speeds. In effect, the Shkval is an underwater missile."

These supercavitation torpedoes, invented by the Russkies, dropped in a ring around a carrier group in sufficient numbers or predeployed in clusters as mines will be all that's needed to erase a US carrier group from the earth. They can be armed with nuclear warheads, they travel underwater at 250 knots (some reports say 300!), are cheap to make and very hard to counter. Everyone in the Pentagon knows this, but they've all got their heads stuck in the sand the way they did before the last WW when Billy Mitchell tried to explain how valuable airplanes would be. They court martialed him for his wisdom.

The carriers are the Navy's pride and joy and are often used by US Presidents to "project power" in distant locations. The USN will *never* give them up without a disaster forcing them to. My own estimate after reading dozens of articles is that in a confrontation with China, we will lose at least one carrier and perhaps a dozen support ships to the Shkval and its cousins. I can almost see the video in my head the way I see the WTC collapse.

China's already shown they can knock out our satelites and those play heavily in a carrier group's defense against attack by reporting the appearance and coordinates of missile plumes. China's entire military strategy seems based on knocking out our carriers and knocking them out fast. I'm sure they know where every US carrier is every second of every day. With enough Shkval torpedoes in the water, there's no chance of a huge ship like a carrier evading all of them. If they have nuke tips, ever a near miss will end in catastrophe.

That was probably a smart decision. My old boss who fought in the Korean War said he's never seen an enemy as determined, ruthless and fearless as the Chinese troops sent to reinforce the Koreans.

-- Bobby G.

[aemeijers]

On 3/29/2011 7:05 PM, Robert Green wrote: (snip)

ct WWIII to start, and if we open up any more SOLIC's like Libya,

Okay- I (and Google) give up- what does SOLIC mean?

[aemeijers]

(snip)

Unless the US gets stupid and intervenes in a China invasion of Taiwan, why would China ever attack us? You don't kill your best customer.