🇬🇧BRIT Reacts To THE UNITED STATES vs THE REST OF THE WORLD!
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 07. 2021
- 🇬🇧 BRIT Reacts To THE UNITED STATES vs THE REST OF THE WORLD!
If You Would Like To Support The Channel: www.paypal.me/kabsayofe
Hi everyone, I’m Kabir and welcome to another episode of Kabir Considers! In this video I’m going to React To THE UNITED STATES vs THE REST OF THE WORLD!
• The United States (USA...
________________________________________________________________________
Follow me on social media:
Instagram: @kabirayofe
Twitter: @kabirconsiders
Email me for business inquiries:
kabirconsiders@yahoo.com
___________________________________________________________________________
COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
FAIR USE ACT
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.
ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS
I think when he said “no nuclear weapons” he meant atomic bombs. Not nuclear powered subs. That’s not a weapon. It carries weapons but the sub itself is just nuclear powered
Jason ryals is right, the video said no nuclear weapons.......
Not nuclear powered vehicles........
Though these vehicles do have the capability of launching nuclear weapons this hypothetical war would not use the nuclear weapons themselves but that does not mean we would not use nuclear powered ships or submarines..,.....
Heck all of our super carriers are powered by nuclear power and can remain on the ocean so long as they have food and ammunition....... Of which during wartime can easily be resupplied through air power....
The majority of missiles on our submarines aren't even nuclear weapons, but instead ballistic missiles.......
Which would allow us to hover outside of enemy Waters launching attacks on enemies with impunity....
But one should not ignore the nuclear weapons on such vehicles for a nuclear war...... For every single nuclear powered submarine is set up with targets already designated to attack if nuclear war breaks out...
And even if every human being on American soil is wiped out during this war every single soldier within these nuclear powered ships and submarines would be alive and would continue wiping out all enemies on the planet using nuclear weapons they have until America is finally safe to rebuild........
It is one of the major parts of our contingency plans involving nuclear war.......
We may suffer immense casualties but we will win no matter what........
Heck we have contingency plans for if every single human in the us both military or land is wiped out to continue the legacy of America for the next generation of humans that shows up and decides to occupy the land........
Of which will guide them and give them the power to recreate America in the image it once had......
This is also designed to apply even if all humans on Earth are wiped out and a different intelligent being takes their place.....
America is not a people, a place, or a single organization, but an idea..... A way of life intended to be protected and carried on even if all humans go extinct........
Yes agreed
This means that the submarine can run for about 20 years without refueling and only food and maintenance upkeep are needed.
Let's be honest if someone tried to invade America in reality they would have over 5000 nuclear warheads pointed straight at them so I seriously doubt that kind of invasion would happen.
@@southernhippie9058 this vids more about us attacking the rest of the world for whatever reason. Lol they already know they couldn't invade us after the release of the first "red dawn" lol
It’s very expensive to have a true blue water navy. Not only expensive, but even if you gave China US equipment they have no infrastructure to support, no training, and most
Importantly the US has been practicing Naval Warfare for 80 years and there tough lessons paid for in blood and treasure to learn how to fight such a war.
Yup, 10,000 ships are kinda worthless if you can't fuel them. Or repair.
U.S. has had a Navy since the the revolution, although it's power wasn't recognized till after WW2
I always think it would be hilarious if King George could know that when he lost that ragtag little set of colonies, they would be the greatest world power ever in a few centuries. I don't think anyone could have ever guessed that would happen.
Colonies yes. However in 1780, 3M English colonialist people is not a trifling amount. It could have been worse. Nova Scotia and Newfoundland wanted to be part of the revolution and in on the war , but were too far away and did not have the population to contribute. So basically were denied admission.
Hey bud wke up America colonized Europe with 2 wars and nato and other botches… it was really the only thing do geopolitically, sell too everyone and clean up both times flawlessly losing astoundingly less troops than Europe, even napoleon our biggest payoff as a sponsors up until German and French English enmity allowed us with the help of banks to really get in their head and they still don’t even know 😂
Europe was too easy with the kings and queens to tear apart as a corporate monster
Its claimed that Yamamoto said, when asked about the possibility of Japan launching an invasion of the US Homeland, "You cannot invade the mainland United States, there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass".
yes..and keep in mind, that besides the active duty 4 military forces plus the coast guard,there are reserve forces for all of them...then you have national guard forces for each of the 50 states, over 900,000 police.If that all fails, there are over 400,000,000 firearms in the US in the hands of hunters (snipers) and many retired (trained) military.
Yamamoto: “You cannot invade the mainland United States.”
Canada: 😂
Mexico: 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
15:00 "Didn't the guy though at the start of the video say no "nuclear weapons"??"
Why yes he did, but he didn't say anything about not using "nuclear-powered" subs or ships... 😁😁
😎
He was talking about extinction balls.
also don't forget, we got normal IRBMs that have conventional warheads rather than nuclear payloads
Great reaction Karbir. One thing they hadn't say in the reaction, is peoples in the United States would protect their own neighborhood if they would be invaded.
seeing that only about 38% of the US actually owns a gun…. I highly doubt that
Lynn Walker that’s 122 million people with guns and a majority of those people are experienced in how to carry their firearm and how to use it, compared to the largest military in the world China at a little over 2 million going by that I’d say the overwhelming numbers are in favor of victory of the US so I would actually do some research if I were you before you put baseless assumptions out there just a thought lmao
Lynn Walker or at least ask Siri what the actual number of the percentage of gun owners compared to the population literally takes 2 seconds. Really made yourself sound stupid
@@huntergermany5909 and let's not forget about the guns not registered, we can protect ourselves here indeed
@@huntergermany5909 My undergrad degree capstone class was centered around gun control and gun ownership in America. I’m not an expert but I know a bit more than the average person and I’m betting a bit more about you. Read the Gun Debate by Goss and Cook and see how little defense the US would had if it just relied on its citizens that had guns. Remember that percentage about 38%-40% are people who live in a house with a gun! Not people who owns and can operate a gun. So that number of 122 million would be drastically reduced since include people who just so happen to live in a house where a firearm is present. And then you have to reduce it further to people who may know how to use their weapon but not in a military style combat. This weird militia fantasy y’all have is really weird and not practical! Especially since other countries have access to weapons that would make any semi-automatic firearm look like a play thing. So yeah, if the US came to the point where they had to rely on citizens to fight, it’s not going to look that great!!!!
"Behind every blade of grass is an American with a gun" - Yamamoto on the difficulty of invading America (possibly a misquote)
You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
Read an article a few years ago that said registered hunters in Minnesota and 3 counties in Wisconsin would constitute the 4th largest army in the world in sheer numbers. What would their end game be in this scenario? Remote destruction or invasion and control of the world's largest economy?
@@stevenroetzel4470 The 5th largest military is Russia, with just over a million active duty.
Minnesota has about 550,000 resident hunters.
It might not be quite the 5th largest when you add in Wisconsin, but it could be close.
Also, for the record there are approximately 15.2 million hunting license holders in the United States every year.
the Chinese and Russian people tryna attack america but not only does the military has guns and tanks but civilians has them too
"Peace through superior firepower."
As a US citizen in America, I certainly feel pretty safe from foreign attack.
Your all extremely paranoid
Why do you say that? Who are you? Why are you following me?
It doesn't get mentioned really in the video, but one of the things that helps the US is that it is actually one of the least integrated economies in the world. US exports trade-to-GDP is only about 12%, one of the lowest national percentages in the world, and a third to nearly half of the foreign trade the US does do is entirely internal to North America (Canada and Mexico). This means that the US doesn't rely on foreign trade to sustain itself with very few exceptions.
It IS true that the US buys a lot of consumer products from overseas (China in particular), but none of it are things that the US is incapable of producing on its own, particularly as much of the things that the US buys from overseas are designed in the US in the first place. The US is fully capable of manufacturing those things, but chooses not to out of convenience and cheaper labor costs. Incidentally, the US is currently going through the greatest period of re-industrialization in US history due to numerous factors, including changing global demographics, American geopolitical attitudes, and of course Covid too.
Another major factor is the Shale Revolution, which is allowing the US to become entirely energy independent for the next half century at least, meaning international politics has even less influence on US energy policy than it used to. It has also dropped US energy prices down to some of the cheapest in the world, with Natural Gas selling almost at cost because it is a 'waste byproduct' of the Shale Oil that they're actually trying to get. As a result of American law, the Oil companies have to build Natural Gas infrastructure alongside the other infrastructure they build, which gives the Natural Gas an automatically usable system to be used for domestic energy consumption, making it the cheapest in the world.
There are numerous other factors that makes the US highly self sufficient, but the short of it is that the US COULD disengage from the rest of the world without too much sacrifice in living standards. It seems a little crazy, but it's true.
I confirm this 1000%
Whoa. While that might sound great. There are serious problems that have weakened USA& now render it in a great vulnerability alll bc of the political ideology of one party. The energy strengthening you mentioned only happened during that past admin.bc the current admin.has deliberately undone it& put USA back onto dependency on MidEast oil,weakened our military,cut military strengthening&maintenance&size as well as canceled new generation orders,mothballed older& deliberately weakened its training, demographics&American spirit of resolve bravery&courage. Further,it was discovered only last by that admin.that USA is solely dependent on China for mfg.antibiotics. The ramp up to bring that back into USA making its own was in the works which was also undone by this current admin. & there are more examples.
Bruh wtf that's insane, really is THAT superpower
And any problem that would arise from that total isolationism, would be quickly fixed and ridden of within a year. The US just sits on the absolute-perfect part of the Earth to have literally everything going for it.
not to mention if this scenario, where the rest of the world went guano crazy, Canada and Mexico, and probably Central America would quickly get conquered and their resources would become Americas.
Don't forget nations that buy US modern equipment from the US can be shut off
This is not true. The ONLY weapon system the US can POSSIBLY do this to is the F-35. The F-35 needs special maintenance codes for the software that the US generates. However, the UK is a Tier 1 partner in the program so they can ALSO generate these codes. All other weaponry that is sold is sold as is. There is no backdoor to shut down the weapons. The US would never build this feature into a weapon because if it exists, it can be hacked.
@@ogkrieg The real countermeasure to having an ally turn into an enemy (using your own equipment) is denying them replacement parts and future upgrades. That's essentially what happened with most of the US equipment that wound up in Iranian hands after their revolution.
The Iranians did manage to somewhat reverse engineer some parts and equipment; but, it tends to be very outdated by today's standards (we're talking 1960's and 1970's tech).
After 6 weeks of air sorties to start Desert Storm it took the ground campaign only 100 hours because the bombing was so successful using stealth for the 1st time. I think it was mid January to end of February , pretty quick.
America would never use will Smith and Jeff goldblum against other people.
Pfft we have a chuck Norris nobody wants to mess with us 😂😂😂
Youre the first reactor that I have seen that started this off with "Who knows what can happen even to the best military in the world if they are against the whole world" which is so valid... most people jump to the (right) conclusion but dont even give it a chance to be the world as victors
If you want to learn about the gulf war react to desert storm the air war day 1 by the operation room and desert storm the ground war part 1, 2 3, 4 and 5 also by the operation room
I’ll check that channel out!
The Operation Room videos will bring you up to speed.
@@kabirconsiders Excellent channel, if you're into war strategy. I'd expect Operation Room would be pretty dry to those who are not into war strategy though.
Here in Florida about 10,000 are part of a militia. The militia I belong to you can only be accepted if you are only a combat vet, and we have 42 members.
The guy said no nuclear weapons, he didn't say the US couldn't use nuclear powered subs. US subs are nuclear powered and the the US has thousands of arms that are non-nuclear.
The biggest thing holding the world back would be the lack of unified command, lack of a common language, and each country looking after itself.
In world war 2 the US and the UK had huge issues deciding what strategies to focus on and how to distribute limited resources, most notably fuel after the Normandy landings.
If 2 countries with a shared language had trouble coordinating, how would 10+ countries with as many languages do. Without an ability to concentrate their forces against the US, the US could defeat in detail it's opponents.
I don't think that was so much an issue between the two countries as just the fluidity of war and lack of resources in general. There are always different strategies put forth and it's someone's job to say do this one. Even in the Pacific there were 2 ideas on how to attack Japan and that was just within the couple dozen or so higher ups in the us pacific command.
but a lot of the the world does speak english now
In today's world shared language doesn't matter. And no a unified language wouldnt help anyone beat the us.
This video gives a pretty decent overview of part of such a war, but neglects a couple key factors.
First, in a total war scenario like the one proposed, the US would have the power to not only choke off the world's oil, but also destroy the water treatment plants and farmland that make wide swathes of the world livable (while producing its own food, much like the oil situation). It is virtually impossible to continue an offensive war if your nation is imploding due to famine, and the US in that kind of war could use this to its advantage by tying up soldiers to keep order in their home countries rather than attacking. This is a massive advantage that there is no easy way for most of the world to avoid (eg. what can the Saudis do when their power plants and water plants are bombed from the air and any support is blocked via the US navy--they are suddenly in the same situation they put Yemen in, and millions are at risk of dying within the year).
On the other hand, a key intangible factor to such a war that would make operations significantly more complicated for the US is the fact that we are a nation of immigrants, and have citizens who have family in literally every other nation on earth. These connections mean that such a war would be politically impossible to sustain for any amount of time, as domestic political pressures in the US would force a peace deal.
Also, while I get that it isn't part of the hypothetical, there isn't really a world where the US would lose all of its alliances. At an absolute minimum, Canada, the UK, Israel, India, South Korea, and Japan would side with the US, which would basically be the end of all opposition. Israel alone can beat the rest of the Middle East in a fight, which would enable the US to more effectively control the oil supply, India, Japan and South Korea would act as forward operating positions for containing China and Russia, and the UK would be a forward operating position for the European theater, as well as a source of navy assets who could lock down Western European waters while the US dedicates resources elsewhere; Canada would contribute to the oil and food supplies that would sustain the war effort, and potentially help intercept Russian planes and missiles aiming at the US.
Fortunately, this type of war is just a thought experiment, as there is little doubt that the US would win, only in that it would be able to declare itself a victor while sitting on top of the wreckage of human civilization (ie. it would "win" by virtue of being the least destroyed in a world where most nations are rubble).
Canada and Mexico would be ours in no time.
they become Geneva suggestions at this point, and screw them for attacking us, lol
Terrible scenario if that ever happened, but thank the lord for our friends and allies around the world!!✌👍
When he mentions Desert Storm he is referring to the way in which the US brazenly stormed into a highly defended and protected nation that knew they were coming and basically did whatever they wanted. The video Desert Storm Air War Day 1 to see how massive a response the US can launch when it has concentrated airpower in a region.
czcams.com/video/zxRgfBXn6Mg/video.html
Love this video but they also forget to mention 1 thing. If we were invaded, 90% of American civilians would also be armed watching over their local neighborhoods
That’s a good point!
Not unless you plan on handing out guns to everyone. Gun ownership isn't that high.
@@xviper2k it is here in Tennessee. I have 7 and I’m on the low side out of every person I’ve ever met in this town
@@xviper2k there's more guns in America than there is people lol. There's over 320 million people in America btw.
@@chadwickvon8019 Well there's no "one gun per person" law in effect, so that statistic effectively tells me nothing except that there's a ridiculous number of guns in circulation. In reality, most of those guns are being hoarded by gun nuts and criminals. There certainly isn't 90% gun ownership in America. Just look at Trey's response for proof.
The misunderstanding about the 5th Gen. Fighter jet is that America has been producing 5th generation fighter jets for 20 years which means essentially America is one generation ahead of everyone else. The F22 that came out in 2005 is faster than the J20 that China released in 2017.
The F-35 is essentially a gen 5.2
for oil, they also forget that America would take over Canada pretty quickly and would more than likely control over 90% of the global oil supply. Also there is no way ever that Isreal teams up with other middle eastern countries. It's the SU-57 is the 5th generation fighter and is in service so it might be the video is old, but isn't out in massive quantities like the f-35 and f 22. The guy in the video meant the subs are powered by nuclear energy not that they are going to use nukes.
Does Canada produce a lot of oil? I didn’t know that
We would surprise them with our maple syrup bombs. 🤣🤣🇨🇦🇨🇦
Jack-why would the us need to takeover Canada when they are an ally of ours with UK & both would hopefully never choose to be aggressors against USA. Should China try to take them over or Russia we would most certainly help defend them from such aggressors.
@@kabirconsiders Canada shares much of the same geology that Alaska and much of the rest of the US has that make for good oil production.
One of the major things that the Biden administration has been criticized for is cancelling a major oil pipeline (Keystone XL) that would have transported oil from Canada into the US (bypassing easily derailed trains, crashed tanker trucks and shipwrecked oil tankers).
That's not even considering the fact that an oil pipeline can move oil without having to burn any of it, lowering engine pollution.
Because of the Japanese peace treaty with the US, Japan has always been limited in fielding a military. The US has been their defacto military since after WWII.
They are now starting to build up because of the threat of China.
We gained the number one spot for are navy cuz we sunk the Japanese navy in ww2 for the most part was checkmate after we took out there carriers
@@michaelwagner2501 the industrial capacity of the US in WW2 was the biggest factor. By the end of the war, the United States had 100+ carriers and 20+ battleships; which dwarfed all the Axis powers combined.
@@chaost4544 did not know we had 100 carriers why did it seem when you watch a war movie seems like its tooth and nail the whole way but in reality now hearing this seems like nobody had a chance against usa
@@michaelwagner2501 the Pacific theater was still very brutal. The Japanese didn't surrender so it was an arduous task to take each island.
About the nuclear thing…
He says “nuclear attack subs,” that can just mean they are nuclear powered. Thus staying underwater almost indefinitely.
I thought that it was revealed recently that China now has nuclear powered subs that are quieter& last as long as ours now thus posing a serious threat?
The opening cruise missile barrage that they failed to discuss would cripple most of those defenses before they could be deployed.
The #1 advantage the US has is geography and the ability to control supplies. The US is resource secure in the Western Hemisphere where as other countries can be controlled through trade choke points, particularly oil. You saw the impact of this in full effect when that huge cargo vessel blocked the Suez Canal and messed up world wide trade. The US has the ability to easily dismantle those types of systems if they wanted to. The US being the #1 producer of oil in the world plays huge as well.
EDIT: I think you would find Dessert Storm stuff interesting. In the First Gulf War, Iraq had the fifth largest army in the world and the US/Allies thought it could be a costly war. What ended up happening was a textbook case of modern warfare showing how outdated older tactics were. That war pretty much wrote the book on how large military's fight in the 21st Century.
Thought it would be a costly war and it was mostly over with in less than a week.
My first husband fought in Desert Storm. What a lot of people don't realize is that many of the Iraqi soldiers started surrendering to the US because they basically were dumped in the desert to fight with very little food. My ex told me that once the official ground war was over, their biggest battle was keeping Iraqi soldiers from coming into their camp to steal MREs. It was kind of sad really.
Seeing how we lost in Afghanistan, we still need to learn to write a book on fighting insurgency 😭
@@farzana6676 Afghanistan is labeled "The Graveyard of Empires" for a reason. Almost all countries who've tried to stabilize that region have failed. Remember, it defeated the Soviet Union.
@@chaost4544
I don't know how much Afghanistan had to do with it and how much our poor ability at counterinsurgency and guerilla war had to do with it.
We took the exact same beating against the Vietcong and it seems we haven't improved much 30 years later.
We are far from writing the counterinsurgency book.
Dude. Your audio is on point. It sounds like your actually in the room through my Bose 700’s. Haven’t seen many reaction videos with this effect. Kudos.
Thanks bro :)
Nuclear attack subs are powered by a nuclear reactor. And do not necessarily have to carry nuclear weapons
Nuclear Subs aren’t necessarily armed with nuclear weapons, they’re just powered by nuclear energy instead of the old diesel powered subs
They basically use nuclear reactors as extremely efficient steam power plants, generating their own electricity and even able to convert salt water into oxygen and create their own fresh water. Food and spare parts are the only limits to the endurance of a nuclear powered sub (and the eventual need to restock with more missiles/torpedoes).
On the first day of Deer hunting season, Michigan or Wisconsin may have the third-largest army in the world.
Your uncle who drinks beer instead of water and can't run 20 feet without wheezing wouldn't last a day
@@movieswithmatticus5469 he doesn't need to run he can man a post with a scoped rifle
@@usmc24thmeu36 That's the most idiotic answer ever. Then why do the armed forces have boot camp? Why not just teach the recruits how to shoot with a rifle and send them on their way? And if he just posts up with a rifle what's he gonna do if he has to move? And by the way hunting a deer is WAY different than fighting another human who wants to kill you. Trust me I've served in combat and know. But whatever you don't understand. I'm out.
@@movieswithmatticus5469 You were way too pressed about this for no reason.
In desert storm we completely annihilated the Iraqi military command structure and swept their battalions up like rubbish. If you haven't seen the live T.V. coverage of the Shock and Awe operation in Baghdad you should check it out. It's a bit long but very interesting.
I just love the way you say words.
Solviet Union was the 2nd "Superpower" class country before it dissolved in 1991, Russia and China however are improving their Militaries as well as: Australia, India, and Canada
It’s an interesting hypothetical, but we aren’t attacking anyone unless they deserve it. In general, Americans just want you to leave them alone; as I assume is true everywhere.
what
Not true Joesej there are many nations in existence right now who do not wish to be left alone in peace like USA& these nations all have delusions of world domination & conquering the globe,esp.western civilization! These are very dangerous enemies to the planet,to humankind,to western civilization & their preferred way of life,beliefs &systems, structure&governance!
Give me the “many” with any capability (not that it’d work) to do it. I can think of 3.
@I am Who specifically has the USA gone to war without being forced to respond? In let’s say, in your grandpa’s lifetime? WW1 Germany, WW2 Nazis, Korea China, Vietnam China/Russia/France, Iraq Iraq, Iraq/Afghanistan Al Qaeda.
Our judgement can definitely be critiqued, but we don’t pick fights, or haven’t for a long time. Not in any big way.
@@nwj03a Now you have changed the subject& diverted from what I posted as my reply. So r u really wanting to change the subject by your question or did you intend to ask me differently?
Really loving the content🤘💰
Thanks bro :)
he was referring to nuclear warheads which we do have over 5000 that the world knows about. . Nuclear subs only use the nuclear power for fuel.
When I was a kid I collected desert storm trading cards😂
Only the USA puts trading cards out when they go to war! 😂
I forgot about those until you mentioned them. 😃
I had some of them as well 🤣
@@captaeh I still have the ones my son's collected. Both of them served in Iraq later on.
There is a great series on Desert Storm by The Operations Room. It shows a day by day break down of Allied and Iraqi forces. Covering both the opening air war and tank battles.
Including the battle of 73 Easting, the last great tank battle of the 20th century.
The thing about desert storm is that the US was able to establish air superiority in a day with little trouble, it’s one of the best examples of how to kick the door down in combat history.
When he says nuclear subs. That refers to the power plant which has a 20 year range. And the narrator completely missed the electronic warfare capabilities to shutdown communications. And fry electronics on other platforms.
Ahhh I see, thanks for pointing this out!
Desert storm - Air war day 1 by The Operations room.
They have the ground war as well. If you really wanna learn more about it.
Actually the U.S. Navy has 10 Nimitz class carriers and 2 Ford class carriers 3rd one being constructed now, but we also have 9 smaller carriers used for marine operations and do carry a limited number of F-35 fighters for STOVL abilities much like the British navy with the Queen Elizabeth class, not the Nimitz class is NOTHING to sneeze at, they are incredibly powerful and bring a lot to any fight,, the Ford class i do not think that we fully know how effective they will become with training and time, I am sure that they will be even more dominate than the Nimitz class already is.
Current Carriers are Nimitz Class.
The next generation will be the Ford Class, named after President Gerald R. Ford!!
I believe that the Gerald Ford will officially join the fleet in 2022, after her sea trials.
I thought that one finished in 2017 and that the JFK one was done also? Or is they are built but not in the fleet yet?
While Russia and China only have around 25 5th gen fighters combined today, the US will test flight the worlds first 6th gen in 2022. Nothing about the makeup of the aircraft has been released to the public because of how seriously secret this is. Just makes you think how powerful this plane must be if they’re keeping it such a secret.
No fuel= no ships no planes no jets no mobility...our fuel supplies and prices are being compromised as we speak...no joke
That 70 year thing - Pearl Harbor 1941
The Us has 10 Nimitz class aircraft carriers and only 2 Gerald r Ford class aircraft carriers and 21 light aircraft carriers
And didn’t the current admin cancel all the orders for more that were alrdy put in the works by the prior admin?
Nuclear attack subs means they don’t use gas. They run on nuclear reactors and are quiet.
Desert storm last 35 days. Desert Storm started as an air campaign with Operation Senior Surprise, which became known as "Secret Squirrel." Seven B-52G Stratofortresses left Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, and flew 14,000 round-trip miles to, for the first time, launch 35 conventional air-launched cruise missiles at strategic Iraqi targets. It was the longest aircraft combat sortie of its time. I live next to Barksdale .
Operation Desert Storm began Jan. 17, 1991, after Iraqi forces who had invaded neighboring Kuwait refused to withdraw. The conflict is now commonly known as the Gulf War.
Desert storm: america took on the 4th strongest army at a time that most military’s viewed america the way they were in Vietnam. And america showed that their forces and technological advantages when desert storm happened is what showed america was a force to be feared again. Russian military planners were quoted saying the only way to stop an American invasion would be the use of tactical nuclear missiles.
"Nuclear Attack Sub" means it is an attack sub that is nuclear powered, not that it is using nuclear weapons. Being nuclear powered means the only limitation on how long it can stay submerged is the amount of food it can carry to feed the crew, usually 3 months or so.
Why does the USA reveal such things to the world which are of strategic value to the enemy I would think?
@@maryb1923 The fact that these exist has *never* been a secret. Especially since Russia (while part of the Soviet Union) had developed it's own versions. The actual secret part is the specifics on how the sub's actual stealth, weapons and sensor systems work; not the fact that they exist.
In fact, letting potential enemies know at least some of your capabilities can actually prevent war; since, those enemies are less likely to underestimate you enough to think that they could easily win. At the same time, you always reserve some mystery to gain advantage if and when the saber rattling isn't enough to prevent war.
Number one reason is the people and this country will fight to the end
You can have 500 million jets but if you don't have the fuel to train there's no point. We train every day
The Air Force Thunderbird have been flying over my house all day, air show about 5 miles away
Seattle?
@@davidbeck7615 McMinville Oregon
@@momclg Totally wrong but surprisingly close. :-)
@@davidbeck7615 what?
@@momclg My guess of Seattle was wrong but since the airshow you mentioned could have been anywhere in the US and the airshow was just down the way in Oregon, my guess was surprisingly close. I hope that clears things up.
The remarks were not inconsistent. Reference to nuclear attack subs was a shortened way of describing nuclear fission fueled vehicles that can operate for years without any refueling process, not subs carrying nuclear weapons, although in fact they do. Thus, the narrator did not intend to imply that these subs would in fact utilize its nuclear weapons.
OK seen this vid many times lets see your reaction should be good as always.
No no no, only one Ford Class carrier commissioned last year, it's the first of its class and there are more to come.
The other nuclear powered carriers are Nimitz Class and we have about ten of them.
What happened in Desert Storm? We didn't destroy any oil refineries really, that was Iraq under Sadam Hussein. They set Kuwaiti oil wells on fire as they retreated.
What we did was deny their use of Kuwaiti oil assets, destroy their air defense and anti-aircraft capabilities, their Scud missile sites and other long range missile systems, their armor and artillery assets, their logistics supply system, their airfields, and performed strategic strikes against Bagdad and important infrastructure targets. In no time at all we had neutralized his military and sent what was left of it packing back to Iraq.
I was there, eight months total including a couple of weeks of air war to kick it off and only two days of ground war. Sadam underestimated the coalition led by the United States, and we kicked his a**. This was 1990-1991, perhaps you weren't even born yet.
The Suez Canal was not blocked by an oil tanker, it was a container ship.
The aircraft silhouettes you were reacting to are F-117s, not B-2s.
Yes, Japan hasn't been a viable Transoceanic Naval power since its surrender in WWII, with international restrictions placed upon it and its guided socio-economic reconstruction, and rightfully so.
Remember, knowledge is power - Ignorance is death.
Semper Fi.
I believe he was saying Nuclear powered subs.meaning they wouldn't be effected by the fuel blockaid.being Nuclear Powered
As an American citizen I can say that I will join the United states military and fight to the end
He said no nuclear weapons used in this hypothetical but the subs are nuclear powered that can use conventional weapons.
hes talking about the use of nuclear powered subs, not nuclear weapons
Kabir considers it was Actually a cargo ship that was blocking the Suez Canal not a tanker
The Nuclear Attack Sub's are nuclear powered, not weapons, you don't want to burn carbon in a sealed ship under water.
I love my country god bless America.
When they mentioned nuclear submarines, they meant nuclear power subs
For desert storm check out the tank battle of 73 easting. Pretty much the average for the entire war. US and coalition walked over the Iraqi military like it wasn't even there in almost every instance.
Also there is a good Denzel Washington movie about a tank battle and a friendly fire incident during desert storm. Damn good movie but I forgot the name it but that's why we have google.
Also one about a helo going down, that had Denzel and Meg Ryan in it. Again a pretty good movie from the 90s about desert storm.
First US carrier was in 1922. The military has scrapped about 50 carriers since.
When he said nuclear subs, he was referring to how they are powered, by nuclear power, not weapons.
Nuclear attack subs don't only.carry Nukes, they also have non Nuclear Cruise Missiles, and anti ship torpedoes
Do a video on the US new rail gun tech
In the end... money is what 'greases' the wheel, humanity is the 'wheel'.
Fuel is the only true currency. No ships no trucks no planes.
10:43 Russia has the Su-57 Felon and now the new Su-75 Checkmate as 5th Gen fighters. The Su-35 is either a 4++ or 4+ gen fighter
China has the J-20 Mighty Dragon and J-35. The latter being a twin engined budget copy of the F-35
What about the new low orbit high powered around the world hypersonic missile that China tested recently? This poses a serious threat to USA & the rest of the world doesn’t it? IMHO USA bc of its J-C culture keeps the military it has not just for defensive purposes but to affirm& assure world peace & the survival& preservation of its western civilization wherever in the world bc unfortunately there are several nations like a China who don’t want to be left alone in peace but are aggressors& plan for world domination& the end of all of western civilization much less USA&any allies.
The Russian newest fighter is still in development. None are deployed
When they say nuclear submarines, they mean nuclear powered. With nuclear power you can go for decades without refueling and you don't need to surface to get air for your diesel engines. Nuclear subs are mostly limited by the amount of food they can stuff in them but, they can stay under and fight for a long time.
The nuclear attack subs are run on nuclear power, they are still devestating without using nuclear weapons, that's what he is talking about.
Well with all the money we are pouring into China,thanks to this current admin.who has undone all the pullbacks of that done by the prior admin. they should have an equal number if not more carriers& nuke powered subs in 12 months. They have enough ppl to build plants& their ships& weapons much faster than we do.
He said no launching of Nuclear bombs. Nuclear Subs run on Nuclear power but can still launch regular bombs
the question on the 5th Gen aircraft is deployed. Neither the Russians or the Chinese have any that are currently deployed
All people born into this country until recently were born into the draft
He wasn't talking about using Nuclear weapons, when he Said Nuclear attack subs, he meant Nuclear powered attack submarines
The reason most other or all other countries don’t have that power like America, is because America is always there to help when needed. These countries depend on the military of the U.S. so they never sought the need to do anything major with their militaries, just enough to defend their boarders and that’s it.
Nuclear subs are powered by nuclear power; that's what he means.
I thought it was 2 major wars and a small brush fire war was what we had to be able to do?
Hey mate, please react to Lost in the Pond's video called 5 Summer Foods I Only Discoveted After Moving to America! I know how much you like to do food reactions. Bro, this is right up your alley!
As of 2021, Russia only has ten 5th generation test aircraft, the SU-57
Nuclear attack subs are powered by nuclear energy, he is not talking about using nuclear weapons.
It’s not nuclear weaponry. They’re nuclear powered subs. Just means essentially infinite fuel
15:00 I think he meant nuclear powered attack subs
They have 5 gen aircraft now but didn’t at the time this video was made and they are limited in numbers but they do exist
Forget our military, the general population would probably beat most armies.
He meant Nuclear Powered submarines or ships, not weapons.
Do USA vs Greenland
can u react to the greatest American Olympic moments?? Joseph Vincent has a good video
The US only needed 3 weeks to control the air and ground in Desert Storm.
To answer your question about what happened in desert storm I strongly urge you to react to “the air campaign Desert storm” 1&2 followed by the ground war. It will show how effective the US was at surgically removing a nation’s military network and crippling them. It is so satisfying to watch
Yes watching people die is very satisfying
@@movieswithmatticus5469 They were invading another country.
@@xviper2k My point is war shouldn't be something that is ever satisfying. Do you agree or do you think killing people should be described as satisfying?
@@movieswithmatticus5469 it’s not satisfying to watch people die, it is satisfying however to see flawless tactics come together in such a way that it gives you a boner.
It's about the civilians...They all have guns.
There is only 1 Ford and it isn’t operational yet. I think there are like 11 Nimitz.
Russia and India went in together on th Su57 "Felon" which is a great looking fighter and would promise to be a great adversary in 5th generation fighter action. Problem is funding, I think India pulled out after awhile in development. Boeing offered F15ex cooperation and russia offered su57 again. It's mostly an issue of funding. Funnily enough india wants their own 5th generation fighter to maintain parity with China after they revealed the chegdu j20 which is also dealing with a combination of funding and development issues.