USS Roosevelt Visits the UK. Brits In Awe

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister


An awfully big target.

As the old saying goes:

'The bigger they come, the harder they hit'




Right, now you just have to apologise for Guess Who, Celine Dion, Justin Beaver, Nickelback, Due South, Bob and Doug McKenzie, Peter Jennings, Michael J. Fox, Red Green, John Diefenbaker, Molson-brewed Foster's, and the Alberta Clipper, and I think you'll be caught up.

Bob and Doug?.... Surely you jest
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
How would an aircraft carrier defend itself against a simultaneous onslaught of dozens of cruise missiles and an anti-ship ballistic missile?


I reckon in a perfect adversarial scenario an aircraft carrier would be sitting in the middle of a pond with no aircraft, submarines, escort ships or defense systems.


But...



Not apologizing for him neither. ha ha ha


I wasn't looking for an apology at all Zip. I kind of feel bad for you because you thought for all these years that the Canadian Lighthouse vs. a U.S Aircraft Carrier was actually a true story.

No need to apologize. We are awesome. Folks from the U.S. come to a Canadian forum just to talk to us.


You didn't think that lighthouse story was real as well did you? lol
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
I remember seeing an aircraft carrier in Vancouver. That was before PET declared Canada a nuclear free zone.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
Yeah. The world is running scared of the might of the Royal Canadian Navy, what with its 15 surface combatants, four submarines and no aircraft carriers.

Don't be silly. Of course it's not. Canadians don't particularly care though. We don't define ourselves by such silly things. You, on the other hand, must be feeling a little neutered over this story, considering the importance you place on your navy.
 

Sons of Liberty

Walks on Water
Aug 24, 2010
1,284
0
36
Evil Empire
Don't be silly. Of course it's not. Canadians don't particularly care though. We don't define ourselves by such silly things. You, on the other hand, must be feeling a little neutered over this story, considering the importance you place on your navy.

For centuries -- "Brittania ruled the waves." But today, the Royal Navy is irrelevant.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,906
1,905
113
Don't be silly. Of course it's not.

Erm, are you sure about that?




Canadians don't particularly care though. We don't define ourselves by such silly things.
No, you don't. That's why if Canada is ever threatened by another country, you'll have to rely on the British and American to bail you out. I mean, why should the Canadians rely on something silly like a strong military when other countries will just come to their aid?


You, on the other hand, must be feeling a little neutered over this story
Why? Aren't you feeling neutered, considering that the entire Royal Canadian Navy could probably fit on that ship's flight deck?
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
For centuries -- "Brittania ruled the waves." But today, the Royal Navy is irrelevant.

Canadians are smart enough to realize that with the sheer length of our coastline, our navy would have to be ridiculously large to have any real benefit when it comes to defence. It's far better to work within NATO and build the types of ships required by the organization. Now, if we lived on a tiny little island like Great Brittain, we could build ships just for fun.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,906
1,905
113
But today, the Royal Navy is irrelevant.


The Royal Navy could sink that carrier and turn it into an artificial reef in the Solent.

Canadians are smart enough to realize that with the sheer length of our coastline, our navy would have to be ridiculously large to have any real benefit when it comes to defence.

The world's longest coastline and yet your navy consists of 14 surface combatans and for crappy, Cold War-era submarines, and yet you have the audacity to poke fun at the Royal Navy.


It's far better to work within NATO and build the types of ships required by the organization
Canada is so weak militarily that its contribution to NATO is merely the paperwork side of things rather than the military side of things.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,133
9,423
113
Washington DC
The Royal Navy could sink that carrier and turn it into an artificial reef in the Solent.

Canadians are smart enough to realize that with the sheer length of our coastline, our navy would have to be ridiculously large to have any real benefit when it comes to defence.[.quote]

The world's longest coastline and yet your navy consists of 14 surface combatans and for crappy, Col War-era submarines, and yet you have the audacity to poke fun at the Royal Navy.




Canada is so weak militarily that its contribution to NATO is merely the paperwork side of things rather than the military side of things.
Good tactic. I guess even you realised you'd look a complete fool comparing the RN to the USN. Safer to pick on the Canadians.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,174
14,240
113
Low Earth Orbit
Yeah. The world is running scared of the might of the Royal Canadian Navy, what with its 15 surface combatants, four submarines and no aircraft carriers.

And yet there they are, running flank on carrier battle groups as the first line of defense.