Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 13 of 13  [ 124 posts ]  Go to page « 19 10 11 12 13
Author Message
Finfan
Post subject: Re: R.N. Carriers, will they be built?Posted: October 24th, 2010, 6:45 pm
Offline
Posts: 64
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:32 pm
TimothyC wrote:
Philbob wrote:
globalization will only serve as a barrier to warfare for so long Finfan, it would be a very dangerous mistake to think that has changed in the era of global markets and online social networks.
While there were no online social networks pre-WW1, the level of global trade relative to global GDP took a nose dive with WW1 and has only recently really recovered.
Furthermore, trade is much more intertwined now than in 1913. During the Belle Epoque the "metropolis" were much more integrated with their own empires than with other nations. The supply chain was therefore still very much within the control of their own state. The nations which were most intertwined were Great Britain, France and the USA, which all ended up on the same side anyways. In the present there is no major nation that can sustain itself outside of trade relations as they stand today. Take Venezuela, for example, who's government is quite clearly "opposed" to the current international order. Venezuela's economy still depends almost entirely on their oil exports to the USA, the nation that Chavez likes to criticize the most. This is why only total "pariah" states, or states with little to no economic value to the global supply chain, can be attacked/invaded. Such was the case with the mess in the Balkans in the 1990s, and then with Afghanistan, Iraq and Georgia. If a state that is valuable to the global economic structure is attacked, then the global reply will be quick and effective, for example with Kuwait in '91.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Blackbuck
Post subject: Re: R.N. Carriers, will they be built?Posted: November 11th, 2010, 2:21 pm
Offline
Posts: 2743
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
I was reading in AFM (air forces monthly) that they plan for QE to be in service for a maximum of 4 years before it's taken out of service and put into reserve. Leaving just PoW for aviation...

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: R.N. Carriers, will they be built?Posted: November 12th, 2010, 4:47 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
Blackbuck wrote:
I was reading in AFM (air forces monthly) that they plan for QE to be in service for a maximum of 4 years before it's taken out of service and put into reserve. Leaving just PoW for aviation...
QE will be pulled to be refitted for CATOBAR opps, then QE and PoW will alternate between being the active and the reserve hull.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Blackbuck
Post subject: Re: R.N. Carriers, will they be built?Posted: November 12th, 2010, 8:40 am
Offline
Posts: 2743
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
See that's what I thought but the wording in that seems to dictate it's just going to sit there :\

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 13 of 13  [ 124 posts ]  Return to “Off Topic” | Go to page « 19 10 11 12 13

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]