• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Breaking News: Canada has a Navy

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
RabidMongoose said:
This is probably related to Canadian hostilities toward international straits.
Click to expand...
Foolish trolling.

The Northwest Passage is no more international than the Inside Passage:



A precedent is of the USA whining against its undeterred access within certainly contained and internal Canadian territory and equally losing. Manifest Destiny our ass. 54-40 or fight never served you too well, nor will it ever. 😉
 
I went to "war" against the Ojibwa in a fifth flight Los Angeles fast attack sub. They kicked out butt. Not really a fair fight, as it was entirely in coastal waters were diesel subs reign supreme.

Got to tour it afterwards, nice sub. Old (I think it has since been decommissioned), but her submariners were people I would gladly have gone to war with, defending our continent.
 
Whiskey16 said:
Foolish trolling.

The Northwest Passage is no more international than the Inside Passage:



A precedent is of the USA whining against its undeterred access within certainly contained and internal Canadian territory and equally losing. Manifest Destiny our ass. 54-40 or fight never served you too well, nor will it ever. 😉
Click to expand...

The Northwest Passage is an international strait. Canada can cry as much as it wants, but it will lose as expected.
 
LiuKangBakinPie said:
No first off all the subs will belong to a battle group. Thats why I provided the links what the battle groups consist off.
Strike Group
a carrier
a guided missile cruiser
two guided missile destroyers
an attack submarine

Look at the carriers and put 1 and 1 together where you will find the subs.
So in short
upskirtfail.jpg
Click to expand...

Nope you strike out again. Although Carrier Battle groups do have submarines assigned. NOT all submarines are assigned to battle groups.

You obviously know nothing about the Navy. I served 20+ in the USN Submarine force, just so ya know.
 
Infohawk said:
That is ridiculous. It wouldn't stop any significant power and especially not the USA.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Canada doesn't have the power to stop the US or others, but so far we manage to deterred a complete take over.

IMHO Canada have a good chance of holding our ground since most if not all US machinery are now made in poor quality China. Some US product aren't that well made as well, such as the U.S.S Thresher that sank due to poor workmanship.
 
CanOWorms said:
It supposedly being internal waters isn't sufficient. Canada's claims are rejected by the international community.
Click to expand...

If this were the United States you'd be doing the same things we are. It's convenient that the rules don't apply when they don't suit you.
 
monovillage said:
As long as Canada has the support of the U.S. behind it's claims, the "international community" can go take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut.
Click to expand...

The US is part of the "international community" here that rejects Canadian aggression.

What is Canada going to do anyways? It's easy for them to go against international law on paper, but the reality is that it is a very weak, pathetic, and selfish country that will not even be able to withstand the force of the US as a member of the international community.

The hilarious thing is that Canada is going all out on furthering global warming, trying to rape the global environment as much as it can for a quick buck, and it's creating the viability of this international strait for the rest of the world. Good job, you dumb Canadians.
 
Last edited:
RbSX said:
If this were the United States you'd be doing the same things we are. It's convenient that the rules don't apply when they don't suit you.
Click to expand...

If it were the US, then they would be able to enforce whatever they wanted even if it were against international law. Canada cannot because it is weak. As such, Canada will not be able to go against international law and the international community. Everyone knows that even Zimbabwe is more of a threat than Canada.

Canadians will probably cry about this for 100 years.
 
RabidMongoose said:
If it were the US, then they would be able to enforce whatever they wanted even if it were against international law. Canada cannot because it is weak. As such, Canada will not be able to go against international law and the international community. Everyone knows that even Zimbabwe is more of a threat than Canada.

Canadians will probably cry about this for 100 years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because it's fucking retarded that you guys bitch and complain when people don't follow your rules, but don't respect the law of others.
 
RbSX said:
Yeah, because it's fucking retarded that you guys bitch and complain when people don't follow your rules, but don't respect the law of others.
Click to expand...

The US should follow international law, but since they have actually developed into a powerful nation, they can do whatever they ultimately want because they had the will to develop into a superpower.

Canada should follow international law, but since they failed to have the will to develop into a powerful nation and instead focused on things like greed and queen-worship, they have developed into a weak and pathetic nation, so they cannot prevent the implementation and follow through of international law.

Sorry, I understand that Canadians have a severe inferiority complex, but if you are weak and a pathetic country, then you will likely not be able to reject international law when the stronger countries like the US, various European countries, Russia, etc. come into the picture.

I bet that they would all laugh if Canada even tried to defy international law. I can just imagine it now, Canada's one leaky tug boat going up against a US carrier group, LOL!
 
LiuKangBakinPie said:
The number of nuclear-powered attack submarines in the U.S. force has fallen from a peak of 98 in the late 1980s to 53 at the end of fiscal year 2010, a decline that roughly matches a drop in the overall size of the Navy since the end of the Cold War. Each Virginia-class attack submarine costs about $2.6 billion and carries a crew of roughly 135 officers and sailors.

And no they travel in a group. Doesn't mean they are sitting on each others bum as they can be miles apart which makes them still part of the group. They protect each other better that way and its harder to pick up a sub between other ships than a sub cruising alone on its own Lone Ranger style unless you believe Down Periscope is the US Navy
Click to expand...

dude, are you confusing the US navy with the German Navy of WWII and wolf packs?

sorry but you really should stop posting because you have no clue on the operations of the US Navy.

the second bold part is just plain laughable. where do you get this shit? where ever it is stop looking there because its not improving your IQ.
 
Last edited:
iGas said:
Perhaps Canada doesn't have the power to stop the US or others, but so far we manage to deterred a complete take over.

IMHO Canada have a good chance of holding our ground since most if not all US machinery are now made in poor quality China. Some US product aren't that well made as well, such as the U.S.S Thresher that sank due to poor workmanship.
Click to expand...

Really. The Thresher sank in 1963 before the subsafe program.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top