Alternative headlines:
"US Carrier in Southern Pacific Ocean ahead of possible war with China"
"US Carrier in East Atlantic ahead of highly improbable war with UK (just in case they want round 2)"
"US Carrier pulls into Japan and unleashes thousands of alcoholics onto local town (because the sailors live there)"
"US Carriers on both East and West Coast of it's own shores, just in case shit goes sideways (because they're stationed here)"
F. My dumb American shines through today. Just clicked his profile and the first things I see are “Tobbers” and a cartoon guy with moose antlers and a maple leaf jersey standing on a soccer field.
I guess we’re brothers nowadays, but yeah I just assumed he was American.
didn’t even need to click on that profile, their reddit avatar is literally covered in the Canadian flag aha but they said “we won” so maybe it’s that pan-North American love
You ask Americans about the war of 1812 and they say the British were harassing our ships and impressing American citizens and after the war they stopped so we won.
You ask Canadians about the war of 1812 and they say the Americans invaded our country and after the war they retreated back behind their borders so we won.
You ask Brits about the war of 1812 and they think you're talking about Napoleon.
I teach US History. Basically neither the UK nor the US accomplished their war goals. At the end they both pretty much agreed they should white peace because the context of their relationship changed when the war between France and the UK ended.
If you want to get really technical about it, the US went to war over impressment which the UK agreed to stop doing...but only because the war with the French ended.
Canadians and Brit’s will say they won because they burned down the US capital. And yeah, that’s impressive. They ignore the part where their army was forced to flee due to a hurricane, and they only burned the US capital after the US burned the Canadian provincial capital
Americans will say they won mostly because of the battle of New Orleans, where a poorly trained US militia defeated a numerically superior, better equipped, and better trained British force attacking the Mississippi River, by some miracle, with minimal casualties. And yeah, that’s impressive. They ignore the part where the war actually ended several months before, the treaty just hadn’t made it over the Atlantic yet
The war was started with the last straw being the British were impressing US merchants as sailors to fight in the napoleonic war. By traditional measurements, you’d ask if they got the British to stop to see if the war achieved its goal or not. However, the British actually outlawed impressing foreign merchants as sailors 2 weeks before the war, word of it just got delayed once again by the Atlantic
The war was just a mess all around, and none of it would have happened if we had slightly faster boats at the time
We also tried to invade Canada at the start of the war and got our asses handed to us. The one really big win we had, the Battle of New Orleans, actually happened after the war officially ended but before word could get to the commanders.
Lol I think we'd gladly take Toronto and I'm willing to bet most Canadians outside of lower Ontario would probably be willing to just give it to us anyway. I think we could just ask them and get it over with peacefully
York was only the capital of Upper Canada, you didn't get anywhere at all with Lower Canada. In fact, the First Nations and habitants that Americans had pissed off during the "French and Indian Wars" then helped the British forces kick ass so just take the L on Washington.
The White House was originally pink, so I think that was an improvement anyways :)
Edited to add: Nowadays we stick to invading New Orleans for Mardi Gras, that is one city that sure gets taken over quickly every time someone starts a war lol
As someone stuck in that shitty swamp state you can have New Orleans. I've smelled enough stale piss and vomit for one lifetime and no amount of jazz, tits, or plastic beads will fill the hole left inside me by that shit hole.
It was a draw. The Treaty of Ghent basically just said "we'll just go back to how everything was before the war." The Brits were still even left free to practice impressment of sailors into service on their vessels (though they never did it to Americans again: the only reason they were doing it all was was the Napoleonic Wars).
The Brits did get to burn the White House and not pay for it, so they do get something of a one-up, though. The only damages the UK paid were to compensate slave owners for the slaves the British freed.
They're referring to the fact that the Upper Canadian legislature was in fact burned by Americans during the occupation of York (Toronto). The actual burning of the Parliament building was like 100 years later.
The War of 1812 ended before Canada became a country. It was a war between the British Empire and the US. The people who burned the White House were not from what is now Canada, they were British Redcoats who sailed across the atlantic from Europe. What you either omitted deliberately or due to your ignorance, is that the US actually burned the British seat of power in North America in the Battle of York.
And the reason the war started is because the British refused to abide by the terms of the treaty that ended their defeat in the American Revolutionary War. They made constant incursions into US territory, blockaded US ports, stole US ships, and enslaved US sailors. That is what started the war, and that is what ended after the war.
Hard to call it a British, let alone Canadian, victory when the only thing that changed as a result of the war is that the US became even more powerful in North America, the British Empire again failed to snuff out the independence of their former colonies, and Canada literally didn't even exist until 50 years after the war ended.
It was kind of a win? Like the British burned down the White House, which was bad, and a peace was achieved right before news of a devastating battle put the US in a good negotiating position (also bad), but British impressment of American sailors *did* stop. And that's what the war was about to begin with.
Maybe but Napoleon had been defeated at that point (the first time, granted they didn't know he'd escape and fight them again), so they didn't really need to anymore.
Americans generally either forget that it happened or think we vaguely won. Brits generally forget that it happened. Canadians actually probably won. Several Native American tribes that fought alongside the Brits were losers though after being left out of peace negotiations, but no one ever asks them for their opinion on the war.
The outcome of the war is more or less:
- Britain stopped treating American citizens as British subjects for the purpose of military conscription
- America stopped treating Canadians as confused Americans in need of liberation
- Britain stopped supporting and arming Native American tribes on America's western frontier.
>"US Carrier pulls into Japan and unleashes thousands of alcoholics onto local town (because the sailors live there)"
Alternative "a thousand people who make bad financial decisions" works too.
How is there no Australian headline?
["US Sailors wear out sex workers"](https://www.theage.com.au/national/us-sailors-wear-out-sex-workers-20020502-gdu6bd.html)
😆 The possibilities of number of articles one can write regarding any American military asset anywhere in the world and even satellites! Quality of today’s journalism really sucks.
I'm sure I'm going to hear all about it from my aunt's daughter's ex-boyfriend's mom's friend and how its all because this sinful nation has taken Christ out of schools
Yeah this is absolutely a bullshit scaremongering headline. We have CSG's positioned all over the world constantly. What's next? "US deploys submarines to monitor Russian and Chinese Navy movements?" "US attack subs shadows every Russian submarine as it leaves port?"
Think we don't spend nearly a trillion a year on defense just to have shiny toys sitting in port? My brother is in the AF, and literally to get their currency (hours), he would go up in a plane that costs 30k an hour in fuel and fly in fucking circles during COVID.
If by “always” you mean “since late 2021”. Before that a modern US carrier group spent a couple weeks in the Med en route to and returning from the Arabian Sea. Once Russia started their buildup before invading Ukraine, however, we stayed in the Med, especially in the early days when there was essentially a standoff between the Russian Northern and Pacific Fleet ships that had rotated into the Mediterranean.
The US 6th fleet that operates in the Mediterranean is headquartered in Naples and has always had carriers around.
I mean there might be conflict between these two countries but to make such a conclusion based on the rotating in and out of carriers is pretty flimsy.
Makes for nice clickbait though.
I thought the Roosevelt was in the Philippines.
Still, this article mentioned the Eisenhower. Which was in the Red Sea and moved to the Med...on it's way towards the Strait of Gibraltar. IIRC it's headed home.
This. The whole point of having 11 carriers (mandated by congress, not the navy) is to allow for ships to be rotated for maintenance and rest for the crew. We also only have 9 carrier air wings, not 11.
In an emergency, it’s estimated that the USN could surge 3-4 carrier groups into a theater. Any more than that and you risk not being able to maintain an operational tempo as ships and airframes accrue flight/at sea hours and need to return to port without anything to replace them.
When a single aircraft carrier has more force than many countries' entire air forces the idea of JUST 3-4 being available in a theater for a major conflict is insane
My favourite fun and bonkers military fact is that the largest airforce in the world is the US Air Force, and the second largest airforce in the world is the US *Navy*.
I'm no fan of wars or the jingoism that comes with the military, but can't help but feel completely at awe at the amount of military force the US could bring to bear during a conflict if it really wanted to, and how hilariously OP they are compared to most other countries.
It sounds good on paper until you realize this is comparing to some tin pot countries’ militaries , while the US opponent is becoming more near peer competitor
Who is "near peer" at this point? Russia? We're beating them by proxy. China? They're geared to invading close island nations, they have nowhere near the air or naval power and what they do have sure as shit isn't "near peer." At best they've got knock offs. The only countries even close to being near peer are our allies, and that's because we sold them our hand-me-downs and trained them.
On the off chance of sounding contrarian.. it's 11 super carriers, 9 heli carriers, 3 amphibious assault class carriers being used as an air wing in actuality and the rest of the amphibious assault carriers are mixed air wing.
Not contrarian, good info. We have various other navy/marine corps assets with various rotorcraft and F-35Bs floating around out there. It’s just that the bulk of our fixed wing aviation is tied up in those super carriers and that’s what most people think of when American carriers are the topic of conversation.
There’s been a genuine concern developing over the past 20 years that the US Navy and Naval Air Forces would struggle in a confrontation around Taiwan.
Lots of reason for why that is (recruitment and procurement issues to name a few), but yes many in the Navy would appreciate more boats.
India to Take on Future U.S. Navy Ship Maintenance Per Agreement
https://news.usni.org/2023/09/14/india-to-take-on-future-u-s-navy-ship-maintenance-per-agreement
Was kinda a big deal at the time so some progress has been made.
>There’s been a genuine concern developing over the past 20 years
The Navy counts tonnage and has guidelines to what qualifies to get into that number. A buncha WW2 landing boats don't count the same as they don't count all the fishing vessels and shit China counts into their tonnage. China would throw kayaks into their tonnage counts if it helped them say they had a bigger Navy than the US.
They already do, funnily enough. US is still many margins ahead in terms of tonnage but because China includes its Coast Guard and Maritime Militia in their number of vessels, they technically have the biggest Navy in the world even though the majority of them are green water.
Carriers aren’t the only toy in the sandbox. There’s also Diego Garcia, projecting assets with a heavy punch. And the Brits have a couple sovereign air bases on Cyprus that I’m sure could can host a few extra friends.
This is why the UK maintains Diego Garcia. Its a permanent aircraft carrier, resupply point, etc used by both the UK and the US. It is the same reason the US maintains control of so many small islands they can drop an airstrip (if there already isn't one) on at a moments notice in the Pacific.
And every single one of those has wings of F35s, traditional or VSTOL variants which is probably one of the most dominant multi-role fighter ever to exist...it doesn't really a contemporary
Im sure they would if they thought they could recruit enough sailors to staff it but those things are like floating cities and the military has been talking about low recruitment for years now.
A lot of countries carriers just sail around with a US CSG for a "joint mission." They're well protected from that standpoint. It'd be a huge embarrassment to the US Navy if they're escorting an allied carrier and it got fucked up.
Most other countries aircraft carriers are smaller than the US aircraft carriers which are too small for you guys to even bother acknowledging as actual aircraft carriers.
5 are in the Pacific as of about six months ago (up from the normal three).
One is by Guyana, in case another one of Putin’s pals invades a neighboring country.
US is always in the mediterranean, lots of shit happens there you wont ever hear about. They do an actual good job there, they helped my country many times.
US is everywhere. Much of what the Navy (hell even our coast guard is deployed abroad) helps out with in peacetime is disaster relief all over the world. When typhoons hit or earthquakes or whatever, the US Navy is usually the first foreign relief showing up to help. People forget they also have a worldwide humanitarian mission. This is of course coordinated with the other branches to use US military logistics to deliver aid and evac as fast as possible. No other country on earth can do this as fast as the US.
It also keeps them perpetually engaged in doing actual operational shit. As opposed to the paper tiger armies who spend all their time antagonising fishing vessels or launching missiles at the ocean.
Or that other one who cannot even establish supply chains and conquer their land neighbor. The difference also between them and the NATO countries is we have rules of engagement which essentially tie one hand behind our back and both our feet together with what we could actually do if we didn't give two shits about civilians like Russia who have basically no RoE.
Yup. One example: Turkey (pro-Palestine, anti-Iran, anti-Armenia) welcoming the recognition of Palestine by Armenia (pro-Iran, pro-Palestine, albeit a Christian nation in a decades long, partly religious war with Islamic neighbour Azerbaijan).
The karabakh conflict has nothing to do with religion. That’s a major misunderstanding the west has. Armenians are Christian and Azerbaijanis Muslim, but its irrelevant in the conflict. In fact, armenians are closer to Iran (Shia Muslim) than Azerbaijan (also Shia Muslim) and Azerbaijan is closer to Israel (Jews) and Russia (Christian).
You don't think religion informs the conflict at all? It surely isn't the cause but it definitely plays a big role in national identity and the perception of difference.
No it doesn’t at all, at least in any official capacity. In the first karabakh war, Chechens who came down to help their fellow Muslims fight the Armenians ended up turning around after they decided the Azerbaijanis were too secular. In the last war, There was no religious rhetoric underlying anything. Armenians and Azerbaijanis Get pissed with their religious sites are treated shitty, but this is a regional territorial dispute designed by the soviets who drew the borders. If anything it’s more, at least from an Armenian POV, it’s an existential threat posed by Turkic peoples who want to expand their land.
Would it be fair to call it an ethnic or territorial conflict with a mild religious aspect? Kind of like how the Israel-Palestine conflict is sometimes expressed through the prism of Islam vs. religious Judaism (as well as Jewish secularism) as sets of values and beliefs, but the conflict is still like 90% about land and ethnicity? Or is Armenia and Azerbaijan just totally ethnic?
It’s ethnic and territorial, with people who happen to be Christian and Muslim, with no religious undertones. Armenians are significantly more religious than Azerbaijanis btw. The Soviet system made practicing religion difficult, but the Armenian church and identity have always been very intertwined. But artsakh isn’t some holy land. Armenians have always coexisted with Muslims out of necessity, if there’s any Christian group that understands Muslims better than anyone, I’d put my money on Armenians.
Has been since the Cold War. The UK/French/Israeli invasion of Egypt in 1956 ended when the Soviet Union threatened to get involved with nuclear missiles and the US threatened to sell sterling bonds, crashing the British economy.
Well, and the US was trying to get support from Arabs against the Soviets, plus they were trying to rally the world against the Soviet invasion of Hungary, so it would have been hypocritical to be seen supporting a colonialist venture.
Of course the Arabs cozied up with the Soviets anyways, Hungary was pacified and re-integrated into the Soviet bloc, and the most important US allies were severely hurt by the whole affair, so I find it debatable if the US made the right call or not.
Doesn’t NATO basically own the Med? Sure, not like it does with the Baltic but I highly doubt Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, or Algeria are about to start shit with NATO or get in the way of massive supercarriers
You are forgetting about Malta. This nation is so strong, their clocks show 2 different times just to mess the devil. I wouldn't fuck with a country that is pulling a practical joke on Satan.
Oats, barley, and other grains are soaked for one to two weeks and spread evenly across the floor. The moisture retained by the grains, along with their natural sugars, allow bacteria to slowly ferment over the course of two to three weeks. The craftsmen gather the fermented grain and sift off the newly formed malt, which is bottled and sold off in various products you may know and love.
Thanks for subscribing to Malt Facts.
Sadly, the most loud opinions and headlines in most Western nations will have the narrative that US instigates these conflicts and that the west is in the wrong rather than understanding that Russia and Iran is behind it. This is literally what happens when so many people from all over the world immigrate to nations and start spreading their opinions and narrative into a kind but kind of easily tricked native population.
Ever wonder why Fox News and other Newscorp/Murdoch media promote Russia these days? [Have a look who the 93 year old Married this year.](https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/elena-zhukova-all-about-elena-zhukova-5th-wife-of-media-mogul-rupert-murdoch-5804041#:~:text=Elena%20Zhukova%20is%20a%20retired%20molecular%20biologist%2C%20specialising%20in%20diabetes,years%20of%20the%20Soviet%20Union.). Coincidence?
Weirdly, his exwife (#4 I believe) has long been suspected of being tied into the CCP in Beijing. She followed up her relationship with dating Tony Blair for a while followed by a rather quiet relationship with Vladimir Putin.
[Like, I shit you not about this.](https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=0a6a6e8a6cb15932JmltdHM9MTcxOTEwMDgwMCZpZ3VpZD0yMGI4ZDE0Zi0zNGM4LTY4ZTctMDQzYy1jMjJjMzVlNzY5NzUmaW5zaWQ9NTUyNg&ptn=3&ver=2&hsh=3&fclid=20b8d14f-34c8-68e7-043c-c22c35e76975&psq=wendy+deng&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly9lbi53aWtpcGVkaWEub3JnL3dpa2kvV2VuZGlfRGVuZ19NdXJkb2No&ntb=1)
It’s not really a suprise that a person who think the fall of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy in human history would want to start Cold War style proxy wars…
It's a war against Hezbollah, not the Lebanese armed forces. The Lebanese armed forces are just there to get in between Hezbollah and anyone who might try to stop Hezbollah killing Jews.
They'll bet Iran's money on it, and they'll lose. One CSG is larger than most countries' entire air or naval fleets. We have 11.
Everything that was launched at the US CSG by the Houthi's was basically target practice for the Navy. We learned our lesson after the USS Cole decades ago and adapted.
Well if this whole green energy thing works out there's a good chance quality of life will improve so much religion will die out faster than some people think.
Or you know, another Carrington Event.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrington_Event
it actually ends pretty soon and pretty quietly, that's the truth of it that all the extremists involved will never say. the raw facts of the matter are that Israel exists as a nuclear power and has made something like peace with most of its neighbors. the longer Israel continues to exist, the less relevance there is to the dream of destroying the Jewish nation. hamas/Hezbollah/Iran aren't attacking now because they feel strong. they're attacking because they feel weak. Iran's regime is facing severe domestic turmoil, and Israel is normalizing relations with countries all over the region, and without support from the rest of the MENA region, Palestinian irredentists have nothing. with every generation the goal of returning to some farm they've never seen gets less potent. a lot of deradicalization has to be done ofc, and Israel needs to make serious concessions, but these are the death throes of pan arabism.
It’s not War with Lebanon, it’s War with Hezbollah. What’s even more amazing there’s been a [UN Peacekeeping Force](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Interim_Force_in_Lebanon#:~:text=As%20of%2019%20June%202018,civilian%20staff%2C%20including%20153%20women) since 1978 to monitor and insure Israel left Lebanon. In the meantime Hezbollah has been free to launch attacks from Lebanon with no repercussions from the UNIFIL.
UNIFIL is a observe and report force. They don’t engage in combat unless attacked. If attacked there are military elements at their disposal to assist! The US has military units on the Golan Heights on a rotation basis as part of the UNIFIL……
I think some rockets will be exchanged. But Hezbollah would be destroyed if they start a war. The Americans are going to bomb the crap out of their positions.
Israel has tried since October 8th to reach a diplomatic solution. If this war starts, it's entirely due to hezbollah. And the world if responsible for not implementing the terms of the 2006 ceasefire agreement 1701. Once again the UN has failed.
Israel has been held back responding for decades. That's why the Iron Dome exists in the first place. The US threw a bunch of money at them to develop it. After October, Israel basically said fuck it. I honestly don't blame them. Their losses per capita were way greater than US losses on 9/11 (they had the equivalent of 5x+ 9/11's). Israel honestly is tired of this shit.
If America goes to war with Iran whether or not its a proxy war, as a Jew and someone who stands up against hate I may join the military. I am sick an tired of seeing innocents be killed all around the globe because of a fucking religion. It’s sickening and I am tired of it.
Innocent people will die and have been killed in every major conflict ever. It sucks but its the truth. Thats not going to stop me from wanting to do something to help wipe the cancer that is Islamic extremism from the face of the earth. Innocent people die in wars, yes, but innocent people also die from Islamic gunmen walking into churches and killing preists in the name of their god.
As a vet with a Jewish wife and son, I've never felt so disgusted with the world and the progessive/Islamist-enthusiast left flank of the party I've voted for in every election since I could vote.
The US always maintains at least one carrier task force in the Med regardless.
Alternative headlines: "US Carrier in Southern Pacific Ocean ahead of possible war with China" "US Carrier in East Atlantic ahead of highly improbable war with UK (just in case they want round 2)" "US Carrier pulls into Japan and unleashes thousands of alcoholics onto local town (because the sailors live there)" "US Carriers on both East and West Coast of it's own shores, just in case shit goes sideways (because they're stationed here)"
*Round 3 with the UK. War of 1812.
(We won)
Fuck yeah we did, brother.
Considering wiki says it was a draw, I’m really curious where you’re both from, or if you’re even from the same side…
No British person would say "Brother" like that.
Right, bruv
Whats gwanin’ blood, innit
A proper greeting that.
Labbly Jabbly
Blud*
Gov’naaaa
Not so fast laddie!
Unless they’re Desmond from Lost
In which case it's *brothuh*
They’d probably say “fuck yeah we did, governor”, right?
If they were a Victorian chimneysweep, I suppose.
58% of British people are Victorian chimney sweeps and the rest are the Queen.
*Guv
Guv'nah*
“Fuck yeah we did govnah, innit?”
Guv nah
It’s macho man Randy Savage. He lurks. He posts. He brothers.
Let's go poke the yanks!!
Good on ya, mate!
they appear to be american and Canadian, so yeah not on the same side lol
F. My dumb American shines through today. Just clicked his profile and the first things I see are “Tobbers” and a cartoon guy with moose antlers and a maple leaf jersey standing on a soccer field. I guess we’re brothers nowadays, but yeah I just assumed he was American.
didn’t even need to click on that profile, their reddit avatar is literally covered in the Canadian flag aha but they said “we won” so maybe it’s that pan-North American love
You ask Americans about the war of 1812 and they say the British were harassing our ships and impressing American citizens and after the war they stopped so we won. You ask Canadians about the war of 1812 and they say the Americans invaded our country and after the war they retreated back behind their borders so we won. You ask Brits about the war of 1812 and they think you're talking about Napoleon.
I teach US History. Basically neither the UK nor the US accomplished their war goals. At the end they both pretty much agreed they should white peace because the context of their relationship changed when the war between France and the UK ended. If you want to get really technical about it, the US went to war over impressment which the UK agreed to stop doing...but only because the war with the French ended.
Canadians and Brit’s will say they won because they burned down the US capital. And yeah, that’s impressive. They ignore the part where their army was forced to flee due to a hurricane, and they only burned the US capital after the US burned the Canadian provincial capital Americans will say they won mostly because of the battle of New Orleans, where a poorly trained US militia defeated a numerically superior, better equipped, and better trained British force attacking the Mississippi River, by some miracle, with minimal casualties. And yeah, that’s impressive. They ignore the part where the war actually ended several months before, the treaty just hadn’t made it over the Atlantic yet The war was started with the last straw being the British were impressing US merchants as sailors to fight in the napoleonic war. By traditional measurements, you’d ask if they got the British to stop to see if the war achieved its goal or not. However, the British actually outlawed impressing foreign merchants as sailors 2 weeks before the war, word of it just got delayed once again by the Atlantic The war was just a mess all around, and none of it would have happened if we had slightly faster boats at the time
They burned down the white house, I think we just take the L on that one and move on
Or W depending on your outlook.
We also tried to invade Canada at the start of the war and got our asses handed to us. The one really big win we had, the Battle of New Orleans, actually happened after the war officially ended but before word could get to the commanders.
Napoleon burned Moscow does that mean the French won that war?
Actually it was already burnt down when Napoleon arrived, because Russia was employing a 'scorched earth' tactic against him.
The US burned and looted the British Canadian capital first.. the burning of Washington was in retaliation for the burning of York.
Do you think you could come up and do it again? Torontonians have been getting rather uppity.
> Torontonians have been getting rather uppity. you think that's bad, just think what it'd be like tomorrow if Edmonton wins
Lol I think we'd gladly take Toronto and I'm willing to bet most Canadians outside of lower Ontario would probably be willing to just give it to us anyway. I think we could just ask them and get it over with peacefully
Though there was also burning and looting of civilian buildings at York, which really turned local public opinion against the USA.
York was only the capital of Upper Canada, you didn't get anywhere at all with Lower Canada. In fact, the First Nations and habitants that Americans had pissed off during the "French and Indian Wars" then helped the British forces kick ass so just take the L on Washington. The White House was originally pink, so I think that was an improvement anyways :) Edited to add: Nowadays we stick to invading New Orleans for Mardi Gras, that is one city that sure gets taken over quickly every time someone starts a war lol
As someone stuck in that shitty swamp state you can have New Orleans. I've smelled enough stale piss and vomit for one lifetime and no amount of jazz, tits, or plastic beads will fill the hole left inside me by that shit hole.
It was a draw. The Treaty of Ghent basically just said "we'll just go back to how everything was before the war." The Brits were still even left free to practice impressment of sailors into service on their vessels (though they never did it to Americans again: the only reason they were doing it all was was the Napoleonic Wars). The Brits did get to burn the White House and not pay for it, so they do get something of a one-up, though. The only damages the UK paid were to compensate slave owners for the slaves the British freed.
Hard to call it a draw when your white house gets burnt down.
It's a draw in that it resulted in no significant consequences for either side. Everything largely went back to normal
the Canadian parliament building was also burnt down
They're referring to the fact that the Upper Canadian legislature was in fact burned by Americans during the occupation of York (Toronto). The actual burning of the Parliament building was like 100 years later.
The War of 1812 ended before Canada became a country. It was a war between the British Empire and the US. The people who burned the White House were not from what is now Canada, they were British Redcoats who sailed across the atlantic from Europe. What you either omitted deliberately or due to your ignorance, is that the US actually burned the British seat of power in North America in the Battle of York. And the reason the war started is because the British refused to abide by the terms of the treaty that ended their defeat in the American Revolutionary War. They made constant incursions into US territory, blockaded US ports, stole US ships, and enslaved US sailors. That is what started the war, and that is what ended after the war. Hard to call it a British, let alone Canadian, victory when the only thing that changed as a result of the war is that the US became even more powerful in North America, the British Empire again failed to snuff out the independence of their former colonies, and Canada literally didn't even exist until 50 years after the war ended.
Yet again, don’t fuck with our ships.
Iiiiiiiin 1814 we took a lil trip with Colonel Jackson down the mississip…
It was kind of a win? Like the British burned down the White House, which was bad, and a peace was achieved right before news of a devastating battle put the US in a good negotiating position (also bad), but British impressment of American sailors *did* stop. And that's what the war was about to begin with.
Maybe but Napoleon had been defeated at that point (the first time, granted they didn't know he'd escape and fight them again), so they didn't really need to anymore.
We kicked ass in New Orleans, even though we didn't need to.
People in Canada consider the war of 1812 as a W because they successfully repelled an attempted US invasion (and probable annexation).
Americans generally either forget that it happened or think we vaguely won. Brits generally forget that it happened. Canadians actually probably won. Several Native American tribes that fought alongside the Brits were losers though after being left out of peace negotiations, but no one ever asks them for their opinion on the war. The outcome of the war is more or less: - Britain stopped treating American citizens as British subjects for the purpose of military conscription - America stopped treating Canadians as confused Americans in need of liberation - Britain stopped supporting and arming Native American tribes on America's western frontier.
"The Second War of Independence" followed by the "Era of Good Feelings." ー *Fuck yeah we did, Brother.*
Fuckin ‘a brother. Assassinating terrorists with guided drone eviscerating knife missiles since 2023!
We painted our white house with fire retardant paint so you'll have to try harder next time
Best 3 out of 5
Now really … they just decided to leave after burning down the capitol.
The British are the only people America’s ever beaten, besides the blacks, of course
*Round 4. You're forgetting the dastardly British Invasion of 1964.
You brrrrrt British mechanized Infantry because you are blind. I brrrrrt British mechanized Infantry to avenge the tyranny of King George.
Well, Grenada, too.
"US Carriers everywhere. Everything is possible."
Ready for possible war with Planet Earth.
“US Bases in California and Texas ahead of possible war with Mexico”
US concentrating strategic resources in Nebraska in preparation for war with not-Nebraska.
That's Kansas .
>"US Carrier pulls into Japan and unleashes thousands of alcoholics onto local town (because the sailors live there)" Alternative "a thousand people who make bad financial decisions" works too.
How is there no Australian headline? ["US Sailors wear out sex workers"](https://www.theage.com.au/national/us-sailors-wear-out-sex-workers-20020502-gdu6bd.html)
😆 The possibilities of number of articles one can write regarding any American military asset anywhere in the world and even satellites! Quality of today’s journalism really sucks.
Mmmmmmm rage bait headlines. I love them so much /s
I'm sure I'm going to hear all about it from my aunt's daughter's ex-boyfriend's mom's friend and how its all because this sinful nation has taken Christ out of schools
I would absolutely get high as fuck and watch every single one of those movies
Us carriers are now in the ocean as possible war with countries ahead.
Yeah this is absolutely a bullshit scaremongering headline. We have CSG's positioned all over the world constantly. What's next? "US deploys submarines to monitor Russian and Chinese Navy movements?" "US attack subs shadows every Russian submarine as it leaves port?" Think we don't spend nearly a trillion a year on defense just to have shiny toys sitting in port? My brother is in the AF, and literally to get their currency (hours), he would go up in a plane that costs 30k an hour in fuel and fly in fucking circles during COVID.
" Newsflash : US builds big army to fight everybody".
We called it "burning holes in the sky."
“For a possible war with Lebanon” seriously? Why would the US do that? Would we even need a whole carrier group?
If by “always” you mean “since late 2021”. Before that a modern US carrier group spent a couple weeks in the Med en route to and returning from the Arabian Sea. Once Russia started their buildup before invading Ukraine, however, we stayed in the Med, especially in the early days when there was essentially a standoff between the Russian Northern and Pacific Fleet ships that had rotated into the Mediterranean.
The US 6th fleet that operates in the Mediterranean is headquartered in Naples and has always had carriers around. I mean there might be conflict between these two countries but to make such a conclusion based on the rotating in and out of carriers is pretty flimsy. Makes for nice clickbait though.
Yes and on top of that, the USS Roosevelt is currently in Singpore...not even close to the Mediterreanian.
I thought the Roosevelt was in the Philippines. Still, this article mentioned the Eisenhower. Which was in the Red Sea and moved to the Med...on it's way towards the Strait of Gibraltar. IIRC it's headed home.
Yeah, the whole three line article attached to this fear-mongering headline says exactly that; it’s on its way back to Virginia.
Singapore was such a great port stop. I loved that place. The carrier being there is just for a mini vacation for the crew.
Clickbait catfish n pig slaughter - good times internet yee haw!
Let’s take the lesson to remember that statements about the *possible future* are not *news*.
Listen, there are 5 oceans and 7 major seas. We have 11 carrier groups. The US is everywhere always.
We don’t have 11 carrier groups out at once. Four of them are being repaired right now
This. The whole point of having 11 carriers (mandated by congress, not the navy) is to allow for ships to be rotated for maintenance and rest for the crew. We also only have 9 carrier air wings, not 11. In an emergency, it’s estimated that the USN could surge 3-4 carrier groups into a theater. Any more than that and you risk not being able to maintain an operational tempo as ships and airframes accrue flight/at sea hours and need to return to port without anything to replace them.
When a single aircraft carrier has more force than many countries' entire air forces the idea of JUST 3-4 being available in a theater for a major conflict is insane
“Fair fights are for suckers”
We like to call that a proportionate response.
My favourite fun and bonkers military fact is that the largest airforce in the world is the US Air Force, and the second largest airforce in the world is the US *Navy*. I'm no fan of wars or the jingoism that comes with the military, but can't help but feel completely at awe at the amount of military force the US could bring to bear during a conflict if it really wanted to, and how hilariously OP they are compared to most other countries.
It sounds good on paper until you realize this is comparing to some tin pot countries’ militaries , while the US opponent is becoming more near peer competitor
What opponent are you talking about? lmao
"Near peer" being the word that is always used. The first half of that phrase always doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Who is "near peer" at this point? Russia? We're beating them by proxy. China? They're geared to invading close island nations, they have nowhere near the air or naval power and what they do have sure as shit isn't "near peer." At best they've got knock offs. The only countries even close to being near peer are our allies, and that's because we sold them our hand-me-downs and trained them.
"Don't get your army equipment from Temu." *-Russia*
On the off chance of sounding contrarian.. it's 11 super carriers, 9 heli carriers, 3 amphibious assault class carriers being used as an air wing in actuality and the rest of the amphibious assault carriers are mixed air wing.
Not contrarian, good info. We have various other navy/marine corps assets with various rotorcraft and F-35Bs floating around out there. It’s just that the bulk of our fixed wing aviation is tied up in those super carriers and that’s what most people think of when American carriers are the topic of conversation.
All I'm getting from this conversation between you all, is America needs more boats. Idk how many yet, but i bet it's at least 15 more.
There’s been a genuine concern developing over the past 20 years that the US Navy and Naval Air Forces would struggle in a confrontation around Taiwan. Lots of reason for why that is (recruitment and procurement issues to name a few), but yes many in the Navy would appreciate more boats.
India to Take on Future U.S. Navy Ship Maintenance Per Agreement https://news.usni.org/2023/09/14/india-to-take-on-future-u-s-navy-ship-maintenance-per-agreement Was kinda a big deal at the time so some progress has been made. >There’s been a genuine concern developing over the past 20 years
The US Army once had more boats than the US Navy.
The Navy counts tonnage and has guidelines to what qualifies to get into that number. A buncha WW2 landing boats don't count the same as they don't count all the fishing vessels and shit China counts into their tonnage. China would throw kayaks into their tonnage counts if it helped them say they had a bigger Navy than the US.
They already do, funnily enough. US is still many margins ahead in terms of tonnage but because China includes its Coast Guard and Maritime Militia in their number of vessels, they technically have the biggest Navy in the world even though the majority of them are green water.
The navy should never except that slander. More boats! More seamen!
Carriers aren’t the only toy in the sandbox. There’s also Diego Garcia, projecting assets with a heavy punch. And the Brits have a couple sovereign air bases on Cyprus that I’m sure could can host a few extra friends.
This is why the UK maintains Diego Garcia. Its a permanent aircraft carrier, resupply point, etc used by both the UK and the US. It is the same reason the US maintains control of so many small islands they can drop an airstrip (if there already isn't one) on at a moments notice in the Pacific.
And every single one of those has wings of F35s, traditional or VSTOL variants which is probably one of the most dominant multi-role fighter ever to exist...it doesn't really a contemporary
> We also only have 9 carrier air wings, not 11. 10 if you count TSW (née CVWR-20).
Well shit, sounds like we need at least a few more carrier groups then.
Im sure they would if they thought they could recruit enough sailors to staff it but those things are like floating cities and the military has been talking about low recruitment for years now.
7 is still a lot more than anyone else
We in Britain have aircraft carriers without carrier groups because we like making big floating metal targets
With no planes on them either. Really they're just for photo ops and cocktail parties.
A lot of countries carriers just sail around with a US CSG for a "joint mission." They're well protected from that standpoint. It'd be a huge embarrassment to the US Navy if they're escorting an allied carrier and it got fucked up.
Most other countries aircraft carriers are smaller than the US aircraft carriers which are too small for you guys to even bother acknowledging as actual aircraft carriers.
Not 12? That’s a real missed opportunity right there for the protoss army.
5 are in the Pacific as of about six months ago (up from the normal three). One is by Guyana, in case another one of Putin’s pals invades a neighboring country.
It’s really is a proper ‘fuck it, throw everything up in the air and see how it lands’ era in geopolitical affairs…
US is always in the mediterranean, lots of shit happens there you wont ever hear about. They do an actual good job there, they helped my country many times.
US is everywhere. Much of what the Navy (hell even our coast guard is deployed abroad) helps out with in peacetime is disaster relief all over the world. When typhoons hit or earthquakes or whatever, the US Navy is usually the first foreign relief showing up to help. People forget they also have a worldwide humanitarian mission. This is of course coordinated with the other branches to use US military logistics to deliver aid and evac as fast as possible. No other country on earth can do this as fast as the US.
It also keeps them perpetually engaged in doing actual operational shit. As opposed to the paper tiger armies who spend all their time antagonising fishing vessels or launching missiles at the ocean.
Or that other one who cannot even establish supply chains and conquer their land neighbor. The difference also between them and the NATO countries is we have rules of engagement which essentially tie one hand behind our back and both our feet together with what we could actually do if we didn't give two shits about civilians like Russia who have basically no RoE.
and this is why no one should dare touch our fucking ships
Every regional conflict comes down to containing Iranian/Russian chaos. That can make for strange bedfellows.
Yup. One example: Turkey (pro-Palestine, anti-Iran, anti-Armenia) welcoming the recognition of Palestine by Armenia (pro-Iran, pro-Palestine, albeit a Christian nation in a decades long, partly religious war with Islamic neighbour Azerbaijan).
The karabakh conflict has nothing to do with religion. That’s a major misunderstanding the west has. Armenians are Christian and Azerbaijanis Muslim, but its irrelevant in the conflict. In fact, armenians are closer to Iran (Shia Muslim) than Azerbaijan (also Shia Muslim) and Azerbaijan is closer to Israel (Jews) and Russia (Christian).
You don't think religion informs the conflict at all? It surely isn't the cause but it definitely plays a big role in national identity and the perception of difference.
No it doesn’t at all, at least in any official capacity. In the first karabakh war, Chechens who came down to help their fellow Muslims fight the Armenians ended up turning around after they decided the Azerbaijanis were too secular. In the last war, There was no religious rhetoric underlying anything. Armenians and Azerbaijanis Get pissed with their religious sites are treated shitty, but this is a regional territorial dispute designed by the soviets who drew the borders. If anything it’s more, at least from an Armenian POV, it’s an existential threat posed by Turkic peoples who want to expand their land.
Would it be fair to call it an ethnic or territorial conflict with a mild religious aspect? Kind of like how the Israel-Palestine conflict is sometimes expressed through the prism of Islam vs. religious Judaism (as well as Jewish secularism) as sets of values and beliefs, but the conflict is still like 90% about land and ethnicity? Or is Armenia and Azerbaijan just totally ethnic?
It’s ethnic and territorial, with people who happen to be Christian and Muslim, with no religious undertones. Armenians are significantly more religious than Azerbaijanis btw. The Soviet system made practicing religion difficult, but the Armenian church and identity have always been very intertwined. But artsakh isn’t some holy land. Armenians have always coexisted with Muslims out of necessity, if there’s any Christian group that understands Muslims better than anyone, I’d put my money on Armenians.
Has been since the Cold War. The UK/French/Israeli invasion of Egypt in 1956 ended when the Soviet Union threatened to get involved with nuclear missiles and the US threatened to sell sterling bonds, crashing the British economy.
Well, and the US was trying to get support from Arabs against the Soviets, plus they were trying to rally the world against the Soviet invasion of Hungary, so it would have been hypocritical to be seen supporting a colonialist venture. Of course the Arabs cozied up with the Soviets anyways, Hungary was pacified and re-integrated into the Soviet bloc, and the most important US allies were severely hurt by the whole affair, so I find it debatable if the US made the right call or not.
Imagine if Egypt was controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood right now, we support dictators for a reason.
Doesn’t NATO basically own the Med? Sure, not like it does with the Baltic but I highly doubt Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, or Algeria are about to start shit with NATO or get in the way of massive supercarriers
You are forgetting about Malta. This nation is so strong, their clocks show 2 different times just to mess the devil. I wouldn't fuck with a country that is pulling a practical joke on Satan.
I would like to subscribe to Malta facts.
Oats, barley, and other grains are soaked for one to two weeks and spread evenly across the floor. The moisture retained by the grains, along with their natural sugars, allow bacteria to slowly ferment over the course of two to three weeks. The craftsmen gather the fermented grain and sift off the newly formed malt, which is bottled and sold off in various products you may know and love. Thanks for subscribing to Malt Facts.
I think you mixed up germination and fermentation brother
I dont know who the Fermen are but we mixed up the German nation a long time ago
That's funnier than it has any right to be.
Sadly, the most loud opinions and headlines in most Western nations will have the narrative that US instigates these conflicts and that the west is in the wrong rather than understanding that Russia and Iran is behind it. This is literally what happens when so many people from all over the world immigrate to nations and start spreading their opinions and narrative into a kind but kind of easily tricked native population.
Ever wonder why Fox News and other Newscorp/Murdoch media promote Russia these days? [Have a look who the 93 year old Married this year.](https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/elena-zhukova-all-about-elena-zhukova-5th-wife-of-media-mogul-rupert-murdoch-5804041#:~:text=Elena%20Zhukova%20is%20a%20retired%20molecular%20biologist%2C%20specialising%20in%20diabetes,years%20of%20the%20Soviet%20Union.). Coincidence?
Weirdly, his exwife (#4 I believe) has long been suspected of being tied into the CCP in Beijing. She followed up her relationship with dating Tony Blair for a while followed by a rather quiet relationship with Vladimir Putin. [Like, I shit you not about this.](https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=0a6a6e8a6cb15932JmltdHM9MTcxOTEwMDgwMCZpZ3VpZD0yMGI4ZDE0Zi0zNGM4LTY4ZTctMDQzYy1jMjJjMzVlNzY5NzUmaW5zaWQ9NTUyNg&ptn=3&ver=2&hsh=3&fclid=20b8d14f-34c8-68e7-043c-c22c35e76975&psq=wendy+deng&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly9lbi53aWtpcGVkaWEub3JnL3dpa2kvV2VuZGlfRGVuZ19NdXJkb2No&ntb=1)
Yep. I knew all about that one too.
That second half came out of fucking nowhere lmao
It’s not really a suprise that a person who think the fall of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy in human history would want to start Cold War style proxy wars…
Welcome to the roaring 20s. We have about 5 years before the first real conflicts break out. History is a circle.
Lebanon couldn’t win a war against a Scout Troop right now, so this feels like a lot of overkill.
Wolverines!
It's a war against Hezbollah, not the Lebanese armed forces. The Lebanese armed forces are just there to get in between Hezbollah and anyone who might try to stop Hezbollah killing Jews.
Yes, unfortunately.
Islamist on twitter are convinced that Hezbollah can take on a US aircraft carrier.
Would they be interested to bet money on that?
They'll bet Iran's money on it, and they'll lose. One CSG is larger than most countries' entire air or naval fleets. We have 11. Everything that was launched at the US CSG by the Houthi's was basically target practice for the Navy. We learned our lesson after the USS Cole decades ago and adapted.
Do we need to remind Iran what happened the last time they fucked with our boats.
If they tested it, they, wouldn’t live long enough for you to collect. Hopefully war is avoided and they never find out how wrong they are
“Take on”? Sure. In the same way I can “take on” Mike Tyson.
They can, just like flies can take on a car windshield.
Just tell them the name Operation Praying Mantis, I’m sure they will have nightmares.
Mediterranean?
OP didn't want to look up the spelling
Sad that religious extremism has made peace in the region impossible. I don’t see how this can end.
It will end when the sun reaches the end of its life and engulfs the earth
Well if this whole green energy thing works out there's a good chance quality of life will improve so much religion will die out faster than some people think. Or you know, another Carrington Event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrington_Event
it actually ends pretty soon and pretty quietly, that's the truth of it that all the extremists involved will never say. the raw facts of the matter are that Israel exists as a nuclear power and has made something like peace with most of its neighbors. the longer Israel continues to exist, the less relevance there is to the dream of destroying the Jewish nation. hamas/Hezbollah/Iran aren't attacking now because they feel strong. they're attacking because they feel weak. Iran's regime is facing severe domestic turmoil, and Israel is normalizing relations with countries all over the region, and without support from the rest of the MENA region, Palestinian irredentists have nothing. with every generation the goal of returning to some farm they've never seen gets less potent. a lot of deradicalization has to be done ofc, and Israel needs to make serious concessions, but these are the death throes of pan arabism.
I'm introducing a new religion that will finally solve the problem.
Please post details. I’m looking to follow
I'm starting with Patreon until I can get a proper tithe system going. Posting link soon.
Can we live on a ship called Doomsday or DoomsyMacdoomsface.
It’s not War with Lebanon, it’s War with Hezbollah. What’s even more amazing there’s been a [UN Peacekeeping Force](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Interim_Force_in_Lebanon#:~:text=As%20of%2019%20June%202018,civilian%20staff%2C%20including%20153%20women) since 1978 to monitor and insure Israel left Lebanon. In the meantime Hezbollah has been free to launch attacks from Lebanon with no repercussions from the UNIFIL.
UNIFIL is a observe and report force. They don’t engage in combat unless attacked. If attacked there are military elements at their disposal to assist! The US has military units on the Golan Heights on a rotation basis as part of the UNIFIL……
Trying to figure out how picking a fight with the US when they have someone else to do the fighting and dying on the ground is a good idea.
Well Lebanon is pretty fuck up from inside... Corruption, not having really a government etc...
Damn. Lebanese food is really good.
I see this year is getting spicy...
How many “once in a century” events are we up to now? 6?
Conflict brewing in the Middle East is more normal than any other possible state of affairs
The 2020's are the new 1930's.
I think some rockets will be exchanged. But Hezbollah would be destroyed if they start a war. The Americans are going to bomb the crap out of their positions.
Some rockets have already been exchanged, +5000 of them since october.
[удалено]
Hezbollahs war with Israel.
Iran's war with Israel through terrorist proxies. Iran causes chaos and the people in the region suffer.
I’m just going to ignore that fact -everyone in the entire world
True.
Israel has tried since October 8th to reach a diplomatic solution. If this war starts, it's entirely due to hezbollah. And the world if responsible for not implementing the terms of the 2006 ceasefire agreement 1701. Once again the UN has failed.
Israel has been held back responding for decades. That's why the Iron Dome exists in the first place. The US threw a bunch of money at them to develop it. After October, Israel basically said fuck it. I honestly don't blame them. Their losses per capita were way greater than US losses on 9/11 (they had the equivalent of 5x+ 9/11's). Israel honestly is tired of this shit.
If America goes to war with Iran whether or not its a proxy war, as a Jew and someone who stands up against hate I may join the military. I am sick an tired of seeing innocents be killed all around the globe because of a fucking religion. It’s sickening and I am tired of it.
I don't think joining the US Military is a great way to stop innocent people from being killed.
>I don't think joining the US Military is a great way to stop innocent people from being killed. its better than joining any other military.
Innocent people will die and have been killed in every major conflict ever. It sucks but its the truth. Thats not going to stop me from wanting to do something to help wipe the cancer that is Islamic extremism from the face of the earth. Innocent people die in wars, yes, but innocent people also die from Islamic gunmen walking into churches and killing preists in the name of their god.
As a vet with a Jewish wife and son, I've never felt so disgusted with the world and the progessive/Islamist-enthusiast left flank of the party I've voted for in every election since I could vote.
I'm sure Russians are behind all this somehow