If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   US flies nuclear bombers over China. It's been nice knowing you. Most of you. Some of you   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 130
    More: Scary, flight plans, air defence, Senkaku in Japan, East China Sea, B-52, Diaoyu in China  
•       •       •

10428 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Nov 2013 at 2:36 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-26 01:01:19 PM
SNAFU
 
2013-11-26 01:41:00 PM
The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-11-26 01:46:40 PM
I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.
 
2013-11-26 02:06:58 PM
nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work
 
2013-11-26 02:07:34 PM
It's not like China can attack us.. we're their best customer.

It would like WalMart launching SCUDs against the local trailer park.
 
2013-11-26 02:09:36 PM
FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.
 
2013-11-26 02:10:56 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: It's not like China can attack us.. we're their best customer.

It would like WalMart launching SCUDs against the local trailer park.


I bet those trailer park refugees would be willing to work for less than minimum wage.

Hang on, I'm writing up a business plan.
 
2013-11-26 02:14:01 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.


How many aircraft in out inventory can't carry the B61?
 
2013-11-26 02:14:28 PM

JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.


We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.
 
2013-11-26 02:20:43 PM
So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

How about we bomb them back into the ocean and we call it a day.
 
2013-11-26 02:21:14 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.


Were they armed with nukes or not?

Normally such matters are not confirmed or denied.
 
2013-11-26 02:25:21 PM

vernonFL: JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.

We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.


Good Stuff, guys
 
2013-11-26 02:34:16 PM

vernonFL: JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.

We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.


Someone's tin roof is going to get rusted.
 
2013-11-26 02:38:46 PM
Is VaultCo founded yet?
 
2013-11-26 02:39:23 PM
Read up on the defensive uses of HAARP. There's a reason we stopped giving a damn about an orbit-based anti-missile platform ("Star Wars")

Personally, I won't be losing any sleep over a threat from China or any other b*tch a*s country that thinks they can challenge the United States of America.


/'Murica!
//I acknowledge my own arrogance, thank you very much.
 
2013-11-26 02:39:34 PM

real_headhoncho: vernonFL: JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.

We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.

Someone's tin roof is going to get rusted.


The planes were traveling faster, faster than the speed of love.
 
2013-11-26 02:40:12 PM

real_headhoncho: vernonFL: JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.

We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.

Someone's tin roof is going to get rusted.


You're telling it like it T-I is!
 
2013-11-26 02:42:57 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.


And nothing says "don't worry, we're just flying over" your hot brown underwear zone like a B-52, oh, 2 B-52's, which exist solely to dump massive ordnance on targets below.
 
2013-11-26 02:43:56 PM

zedster: nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work


Is this serious?  I just can't tell anymore.
 
2013-11-26 02:44:43 PM
"We have continued to follow our normal procedures, which include not filing flight plans, not radioing ahead and not registering our frequencies," Also, fu*k you.
 
2013-11-26 02:45:36 PM
Scenario 1:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Send in the B-52s."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama provoke China how come?"

Scenario 2:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Let's wait for diplomacy to work."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama betray our ally Japan how come?"
 
2013-11-26 02:49:45 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Scenario 1:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Send in the B-52s."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama provoke China how come?"

Scenario 2:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Let's wait for diplomacy to work."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama betray our ally Japan how come?"


This.
 
2013-11-26 02:49:52 PM

slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?


More accuirately, they is a dispute over who owns the rights to the nearby oilfields. They will fall into the Exclusive Economic Zone of whomever owns the islands, which noone gives a shiat about otherwise.
 
2013-11-26 02:50:29 PM

Trocadero: real_headhoncho: vernonFL: JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.

We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.

Someone's tin roof is going to get rusted.

The planes were traveling faster, faster than the speed of love.


I take it the plains were as big as a whale?
 
2013-11-26 02:50:52 PM
B-52s?  They wanted to be seen.  And heard.  And smelled for the love of volcanoes.
 
2013-11-26 02:51:00 PM

maxx2112: real_headhoncho: vernonFL: JerseyTim: The US has flown two B-52 bombers over disputed islands in the East China Sea in defiance of new Chinese air defence rules, officials say.

Obama is sending a clear message to China: We will roam if we want to, roam around the world.

We're also defending our rock lobster fisheries in the area.

Someone's tin roof is going to get rusted.

You're telling it like it T-I is!


The region is going to get hot, hot hot.
 
2013-11-26 02:51:06 PM
Always wanted a second Canadian home in California.
 
2013-11-26 02:51:06 PM
They'll keep that airspace open even if it hairlips everyone in Bear Creek!
 
2013-11-26 02:53:49 PM
Are there only 600 million screaming china-men left?
 
2013-11-26 02:55:21 PM
We could argue that we just flew them over Japanese territory
 
2013-11-26 02:55:39 PM
Looks like its time to whip our collective dicks out ...

/My money is on Obama for obvious reasons
 
2013-11-26 02:55:52 PM
Ok, a few. In fact, you know what - Good riddance!
 
2013-11-26 02:55:59 PM
Well, I'll be in my bunker. I've got 10 fifty-gallon drums of spam, 12 ten-gallon jugs of water, every episode of MST3K, a coffee maker and coffee, a stash of booze and weed, and enough ammo to arm a third-world nation. /Meet up at the ruins of Congress and we'll found a new nation.
//Oh, and keep your bottlecaps. They will be used as money, as will Stanford-funbucks.
///Who's laughing now 7-11 clerk!
 
2013-11-26 02:57:28 PM

zedster: nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work


They did; they were just a really bad idea.
 
2013-11-26 02:59:25 PM

vygramul: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Scenario 1:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Send in the B-52s."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama provoke China how come?"

Scenario 2:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Let's wait for diplomacy to work."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama betray our ally Japan how come?"

This.


So vote Repubican?
 
2013-11-26 03:01:07 PM

slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?


Macau is around that size. China sure seemed interested in getting Macau back.
 
2013-11-26 03:01:31 PM
"Hello? Uh, hello? Hello, Li? Listen, I can't hear too well, do you suppose you could turn the music down just a little? A-ha, that's much better. Yeah, yes. Fine, I can hear you now, Li. Clear and plain and coming through fine. I'm coming through fine too, eh? Good, then. Well then, as you say, we're both coming through fine. Good. Well, it's good that you're fine, and - and I'm fine. I agree with you. It's great to be fine. [Laughs] Now then, Li, you know how we've always talked about the possibility of something going wrong with the bomb. The BOMB, Li. The hydrogen bomb. Well now, what happened is, uh, one of our base commanders, he had a sort of - Well, he went a little funny in the head. You know. Just a little funny. And uh, he went and did a silly thing..."
 
2013-11-26 03:02:16 PM
Where were the lines drawn after WW2? Japan jumped into the American sphere faster than a Go-Bot in a Zero, so anything agreed to back then should hold now. China is a little late to the game, but they have been working out....
 
2013-11-26 03:02:22 PM

2wolves: B-52s?  They wanted to be seen.  And heard.  And smelled for the love of volcanoes.


Chinese observer: "Oh, cool, look, must be vintage aircraft day."
 
2013-11-26 03:02:29 PM

Transubstantive: zedster: nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work

Is this serious?  I just can't tell anymore.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto
 
2013-11-26 03:03:23 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.


That's funny, given USAs normal policy of never commenting on whether something is nuclear armed.
 
2013-11-26 03:03:25 PM

tuxq: Read up on the defensive uses of HAARP. There's a reason we stopped giving a damn about an orbit-based anti-missile platform ("Star Wars")


1-media-cdn.foolz.us
 
2013-11-26 03:03:42 PM

Richard C Stanford: Well, I'll be in my bunker. I've got 10 fifty-gallon drums of spam, 12 ten-gallon jugs of water, every episode of MST3K, a coffee maker and coffee, a stash of booze and weed, and enough ammo to arm a third-world nation. /Meet up at the ruins of Congress and we'll found a new nation.
//Oh, and keep your bottlecaps. They will be used as money, as will Stanford-funbucks.
///Who's laughing now 7-11 clerk!


Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff.
 
2013-11-26 03:03:46 PM
The "East China Sea Air Defense Zone" is not China, subby. It's an area of international waters that China has unilaterally laid claim to. Sort of how Libya drew a "line of death" across the Gulf of Sidra back in '81. They were right, it WAS a line of death, but only for Libyans. I doubt the Chinese are going to push it beyond a bit of buzzing.

/P-3 combat record vs. J8 fighter: 1-0.
 
2013-11-26 03:03:59 PM

Brontes: Are there only 600 million screaming china-men left?


Unlike Russia, the US doesn't have a land border with China over which those screaming Chinamen can run.

Because China doesn't have enough ships to ferry them all over.
 
2013-11-26 03:04:08 PM
In before "fartbongo".
 
2013-11-26 03:05:20 PM
We'll... meet again... don't know where... don't know wheeennnnn...
 
2013-11-26 03:07:12 PM
Unarmed for a bomber like that means that the codes have not been uploaded and doesn't mean that the plane did not have any nuclear weapons onboard. It just means if the pilots wanted to they could not use the weapons.
 
2013-11-26 03:07:21 PM
news.bbcimg.co.uk

Yeah, I'd say those are worth starting WW3 over.

/hot
 
2013-11-26 03:08:08 PM

This text is now purple: slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

Macau is around that size. China sure seemed interested in getting Macau back.


They don't care about the land. They care about the mineral and fishing rights. Own the Senkakus, and you wind up owning a big old natural-gas deposit. Plus, you can push your claims to other little rocks in the East and South China seas, like the ones in dispute with the Philippines.
 
2013-11-26 03:09:38 PM
We did not fly over China, subtard.
 
2013-11-26 03:09:40 PM
6inchmove.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-11-26 03:10:56 PM

Cowthulu: Unarmed for a bomber like that means that the codes have not been uploaded and doesn't mean that the plane did not have any nuclear weapons onboard. It just means if the pilots wanted to they could not use the weapons.


B-52s don't routinely carry nukes. Just the SAC ones do, and there are few of those left. Strategic bombing is something of a fantasy; you can't escort Buffs all the way to their targets, and any modern air defense system would make short work of them. Buffs are still a very effective weapon against defenseless ground forces, but that doesn't describe China or Russia.
 
2013-11-26 03:11:17 PM
While China has a lot of people if it where to go to war we would quickly leave China a country where people are wearing next to nothing because its hot like an oven.
 
2013-11-26 03:15:26 PM
Everybody seems to overestimate China's military. The combined forces of Vietnam, India, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea and Japan could probably take them, even WITHOUT U.S. support. Those countries do multi-national exercises with the U.S. and each other just for that reason. The biggest reason for U.S. presence in the western Pacific is to ensure those countries (who are or can be major trading partners) don't get individually bullied by China; it's not because of some head-to-head conflict between the U.S. and China.
 
2013-11-26 03:15:27 PM
Think Falklands, but with moss and plants instead of sheep farmers, and oil instead of sheep.

Uninhabited islands.  Japanese sovereignty claimed since 1895.  China not interested in them until oil found nearby.

This would be a good time for a game of rock-paper-scissors.
 
2013-11-26 03:15:56 PM

tuxq: Read up on the defensive uses of HAARP. There's a reason we stopped giving a damn about an orbit-based anti-missile platform ("Star Wars")

Personally, I won't be losing any sleep over a threat from China or any other b*tch a*s country that thinks they can challenge the United States of America.


/'Murica!
//I acknowledge my own arrogance, thank you very much.


You need to watch the documentary 'Red Dawn' (2012). If the fricking North Koreans could invade us, the Chinese could too!


/pretty sure the B52s in Guam are packing nuclear cruise missiles 24/7. They just deny officially deny it.
 
2013-11-26 03:16:32 PM
This may be the end of modern civilization. Nobody will be bombed back to the stone age but you may need to turn your watch back about a hundred-thousand years.
 
2013-11-26 03:17:08 PM

Cubicle Jockey: slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

More accuirately, they is a dispute over who owns the rights to the nearby oilfields. They will fall into the Exclusive Economic Zone of whomever owns the islands, which noone gives a shiat about otherwise.


This.  Plus maybe fishing rights.
 
2013-11-26 03:18:17 PM

slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

How about we bomb them back into the ocean and we call it a day.


They're having a dispute over control of oil reserves, and also over who has the biggest pecker.
 
2013-11-26 03:19:03 PM

Cowthulu: Unarmed for a bomber like that means that the codes have not been uploaded and doesn't mean that the plane did not have any nuclear weapons onboard. It just means if the pilots wanted to they could not use the weapons.


Huh?

Lemme guess....5 years in the Women's Auxialliary Balloon Corps?

If you had ever served, you'd konw that actual nuclear weapons are almost NEVER loaded on aircraft deployed for routine training flights in peacetime, especially over international territory.  It's not about "codes" or unauthorized use.  There's way too much risk of loss or compromise in the event of a crash or other problem.
 
2013-11-26 03:20:05 PM
Based on that map, the area of ocean in question is being defended twice, and so should be quite safe. I don't know what the big deal is here.
 
2013-11-26 03:24:44 PM

Cubicle Jockey: which noone gives a shiat about otherwise.


I do.
 
2013-11-26 03:25:13 PM

Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Scenario 1:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Send in the B-52s."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama provoke China how come?"

Scenario 2:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Let's wait for diplomacy to work."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama betray our ally Japan how come?"

This.

So vote Repubican?


Both Decisions Are Wrong So Vote Republican!

BDAWSVR!
 
2013-11-26 03:27:19 PM

Amphibious Rodent: [news.bbcimg.co.uk image 464x261]

Yeah, I'd say those are worth starting WW3 over.

/hot


psst! There's oil under there! That's why everyone in the region really cares about them!
 
2013-11-26 03:27:39 PM

SovietCanuckistan: Where were the lines drawn after WW2? Japan jumped into the American sphere faster than a Go-Bot in a Zero, so anything agreed to back then should hold now. China is a little late to the game, but they have been working out....


Japan has held claim to the Senkakus since 1895. The U.S. controlled them between 1945 and 1972, when they turned them back over to Japan. Nobody cared about it until they started looking at oil and gas development in the East China Sea in the late '60s. Actual "ownership" is murky, and a matter for lawyers, hinging on China's disputed claim of prior ownership from the 1500s, and the wording of the treaties that settled matters after WWII. China and Taiwan claim they're part of Taiwan (of course, China claims that Taiwan is part of China). Japan doesn't recognize Taiwan's government, so they say there's nothing to talk about. Sort of the way the U.K. feels about the Falklands, only without actual islanders to have a sayso. And Japan doesn't lose a proximity argument; the islands are the same distance from Okinawa as they are from Taiwan, and twice that far to mainland China.
 
KIA
2013-11-26 03:28:11 PM
Step 1: Fly 50-year old planes over contested islands
Step 2: ??? (doesn't matter, they're 50-year old planes)
Step 3: Claim moral victory
 
2013-11-26 03:28:23 PM

This text is now purple: Transubstantive: zedster: nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work

Is this serious?  I just can't tell anymore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto


That and more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_aircraft
 
2013-11-26 03:28:31 PM
Fallout 4 is going to be a reboot?
 
2013-11-26 03:29:59 PM

KIA: Step 1: Fly 50-year old planes over contested islands
Step 2: ??? (doesn't matter, they're 50-year old planes)
Step 3: Claim moral victory


How do you think we planned on getting rid of Iran's nukes?
 
2013-11-26 03:30:57 PM
Heh, sounds like sovereign citizens. Don't acknowledge their rules and deny their jurisdiction and claim. They are remaining seated when asked to rise.

I realize the Japanese are evil people the Chinese hate to no end but maybe they should just leave them alone since they don't have a very large landmass. You already have enough, China.
 
2013-11-26 03:31:30 PM

mbillips: And Japan doesn't lose a proximity argument; the islands are the same distance from Okinawa as they are from Taiwan, and twice that far to mainland China.


China likely considers Okinawa to be Chinese.

\Okinawa isn't historically part of Japan or China
 
2013-11-26 03:35:16 PM

This text is now purple: mbillips: And Japan doesn't lose a proximity argument; the islands are the same distance from Okinawa as they are from Taiwan, and twice that far to mainland China.

China likely considers Okinawa to be Chinese.

\Okinawa isn't historically part of Japan or China


Well, by the same standards Virginia isn't historically part of the U.S.
 
2013-11-26 03:35:32 PM
Just wait, the day will come when China starts thinking about reclaiming the Amur region and maybe a chunk of Siberia from the Russians.
 
2013-11-26 03:35:35 PM

slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

How about we bomb them back into the ocean and we call it a day.


Why don't we invade and call it our own Private Idaho?
 
2013-11-26 03:42:25 PM
Unarmed bombers fly over islands actually claimed by Japan.
 
2013-11-26 03:43:07 PM

This text is now purple: mbillips: And Japan doesn't lose a proximity argument; the islands are the same distance from Okinawa as they are from Taiwan, and twice that far to mainland China.

China likely considers Okinawa to be Chinese.

\Okinawa isn't historically part of Japan or China


China thinks the Ryukyus should be "independent." Which is to say, under Chinese economic and military domination if not direct political control. Okinawa was first conquered by the Japanese in 1609 and was a subject kingdom up until the 1870s, so it depends on what you mean by "historically."
 
2013-11-26 03:43:56 PM
1.  Unarmed bombers
2.  Routine training flight.
3.  Not China, Senkaku islands.


Thanks for playing Fark's Most Unnecessarily Alarmist Headline of the Day.
 
2013-11-26 03:45:08 PM
Iraq 1
Afghanistan
Iraq 2
North Korea
(still maybe)
Iran
China
 
2013-11-26 03:49:58 PM

Prophet of Loss: Iraq 1
Afghanistan
Iraq 2
North Korea (still maybe)
Iran
China


You forgot Libya, Syria, and, if you believe Fark armchair admirals, Russia.
 
2013-11-26 03:54:09 PM

slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

How about we bomb them back into the ocean and we call it a day.


Just wait a little while-- global warming will take care of this problem very soon.  No island, no dispute!
 
2013-11-26 03:55:50 PM
The bigger the bomber, the smaller the penis. Or does that only apply to monster trucks.
 
2013-11-26 03:59:56 PM
Nothing a team of bulldozers can't fix.
 
2013-11-26 04:06:01 PM
img.fark.net

If only there was some way we could divide the territory up between the two countries.
 
2013-11-26 04:08:45 PM

Ambitwistor: tuxq: Read up on the defensive uses of HAARP. There's a reason we stopped giving a damn about an orbit-based anti-missile platform ("Star Wars")

[1-media-cdn.foolz.us image 363x310]


Good grief, this. Last week I took about a day doing the research on that crap of a conspiracy. I couldn't stop laughing the entire time.

/kicker was at the end, when I looked up the credentials of the guy who wrote the book. Bought a degree for $4k off a Sri Lankan online university that even the Sri Lankan government doesn't recognize. The other degree is honorary.
 
2013-11-26 04:14:18 PM

vygramul: Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Scenario 1:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Send in the B-52s."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama provoke China how come?"

Scenario 2:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Let's wait for diplomacy to work."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama betray our ally Japan how come?"

This.

So vote Repubican?

Both Decisions Are Wrong So Vote Republican!

BDAWSVR!


You just solved the mystery of the Welsh language. Turns out they are a remnant of an ancient civilization that invented Acronyms and Text-Speak. The civilization fell when everyone started pronouncing the acronyms and text-speak for every day use.
 
2013-11-26 04:16:18 PM
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2013-11-26 04:23:23 PM
Really, 87 comments?

www.beldar.org
 
2013-11-26 04:52:09 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: It's not like China can attack us.. we're their best customer.

It would like WalMart launching SCUDs against the local trailer park.


It's not like China could attack us... period. They have no strategic bombers that could reach us, their Navy would have to get past our Navy, our air force, and hell, some of our Army units. And that is prior to landing. (I imagine an A-10 or a Apache could really get the better of a troop transport that strayed close enough to land.)

Now, if they would like to duke this out with Nuclear weapons, they could hit us. Our retaliation would be terrible. Heck, we might not even retaliate with nukes. We'd bomb them into oblivion with conventional weapons just so we can drag their leaders through the streets and hang them.
 
2013-11-26 05:06:13 PM
P-3 combat record vs. J8 fighter: 1-0

I see what yu did there & laughed heartily !
 
2013-11-26 05:06:32 PM

Evil Twin Skippy: Eddie Adams from Torrance: It's not like China can attack us.. we're their best customer.

It would like WalMart launching SCUDs against the local trailer park.

It's not like China could attack us... period. They have no strategic bombers that could reach us, their Navy would have to get past our Navy, our air force, and hell, some of our Army units. And that is prior to landing. (I imagine an A-10 or a Apache could really get the better of a troop transport that strayed close enough to land.)

Now, if they would like to duke this out with Nuclear weapons, they could hit us. Our retaliation would be terrible. Heck, we might not even retaliate with nukes. We'd bomb them into oblivion with conventional weapons just so we can drag their leaders through the streets and hang them.


I always though that the problem was actually Russia? Like, they would  step in if we got aggressive with China?
 
2013-11-26 05:06:52 PM

washington-babylon: vygramul: Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Scenario 1:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Send in the B-52s."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama provoke China how come?"

Scenario 2:

    * China:  "Them islands is ours!"
    * Obama:  "Let's wait for diplomacy to work."
    * Morans:  "How come 0bama betray our ally Japan how come?"

This.

So vote Repubican?

Both Decisions Are Wrong So Vote Republican!

BDAWSVR!

You just solved the mystery of the Welsh language. Turns out they are a remnant of an ancient civilization that invented Acronyms and Text-Speak. The civilization fell when everyone started pronouncing the acronyms and text-speak for every day use.


+1 Internets to you, sir!
 
2013-11-26 05:07:06 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-11-26 05:11:54 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.


As far as I'm concerned, it's not whether they're carrying nukes but whether they're powered by nuclear reactors.
 
2013-11-26 05:19:12 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: FTA: "The aircraft, which were unarmed"

They're not "nuclear bombers" if they're not carrying nukes.



And miss the obvious troll-like headline?

They should have used this as the stock photo:

img.fark.net
 
2013-11-26 05:22:45 PM
copiouscope.files.wordpress.com

Obligatory?
 
2013-11-26 05:33:46 PM

This text is now purple: slayer199: So let me get his straight...they're having a dispute over less than 3 square miles of islands?

Macau is around that size. China sure seemed interested in getting Macau back.


Didn't hurt that Macau is like China's version of Las Vegas.
 
2013-11-26 05:37:36 PM
On your mark

Get set

....
 
2013-11-26 05:43:11 PM
Of all the things to send over? B-52s? The planes that SAMs could easily shoot down since the 1960's? Yeah. The brass in Beijing are p*ssing themselves now, I bet.

How come Fatty Dingdongs in Best Korea can get a B2 show but all the Chinese get are Grampa's bombers?
 
2013-11-26 05:43:49 PM

vpb: I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.


Suddenly glad I haven't moved out of the semi-safe zone yet (yes, I actually checked the government projection maps).
 
2013-11-26 05:52:16 PM

What's wrong with exercising our stuff?


Can't let 'em sit around all the time .. they'll rust or something.



www.theblindcard.com
 
2013-11-26 05:52:27 PM
TV's Vinnie

Of all the things to send over? B-52s? The planes that SAMs could easily shoot down since the 1960's? Yeah. The brass in Beijing are p*ssing themselves now, I bet.

How come Fatty Dingdongs in Best Korea can get a B2 show but all the Chinese get are Grampa's bombers?


We're daring them to do something.  The equivilent of standing in front of some guy on the sidewalk with your hands down at your side, right up in his face.

"Hit me, asshole, and see what happens".
 
2013-11-26 06:01:46 PM

ladyfortuna: vpb: I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

Suddenly glad I haven't moved out of the semi-safe zone yet (yes, I actually checked the government projection maps).


Depending on how it all goes down, you might not want to survive it. There are fates worse than death.
 
2013-11-26 06:03:39 PM

studebaker hoch: TV's Vinnie

Of all the things to send over? B-52s? The planes that SAMs could easily shoot down since the 1960's? Yeah. The brass in Beijing are p*ssing themselves now, I bet.

How come Fatty Dingdongs in Best Korea can get a B2 show but all the Chinese get are Grampa's bombers?

We're daring them to do something.  The equivilent of standing in front of some guy on the sidewalk with your hands down at your side, right up in his face.

"Hit me, asshole, and see what happens".


Yup. Anything happens to one of those B-52s, it's showtime.
 
2013-11-26 06:08:26 PM

mbillips: Cowthulu: Unarmed for a bomber like that means that the codes have not been uploaded and doesn't mean that the plane did not have any nuclear weapons onboard. It just means if the pilots wanted to they could not use the weapons.

B-52s don't routinely carry nukes. Just the SAC ones do, and there are few of those left. Strategic bombing is something of a fantasy; you can't escort Buffs all the way to their targets, and any modern air defense system would make short work of them. Buffs are still a very effective weapon against defenseless ground forces, but that doesn't describe China or Russia.


Oh yeah? Well, If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!
 
2013-11-26 06:11:37 PM

This text is now purple: Brontes: Are there only 600 million screaming china-men left?

Unlike Russia, the US doesn't have a land border with China over which those screaming Chinamen can run.

Because China doesn't have enough ships to ferry them all over.


they'll just purchase a metric butt-load of houses in Vegas and Phoenix, and slip in a few at a time.
 
2013-11-26 06:43:19 PM

Jeep2011: SNAFU


This goes beyond SNAFU and right into TARFU territory
 
2013-11-26 06:54:30 PM

This text is now purple: China likely considers Okinawa to be Chinese.


As far as I know, they don't.

(But yeah Okinawa is part of Japan only fairly recently as the history of Japan goes... it's sort of "Japan's Hawaii" in a lot of ways.)
 
2013-11-26 06:55:07 PM

tuxq: Read up on the defensive uses of HAARP. There's a reason we stopped giving a damn about an orbit-based anti-missile platform ("Star Wars")

Personally, I won't be losing any sleep over a threat from China or any other b*tch a*s country that thinks they can challenge the United States of America.


/'Murica!
//I acknowledge my own arrogance, thank you very much.


Im feeling slowed by a new bourbon "Stetson", could you perhaps explain to me the defensive uses of HAARP?
 
2013-11-26 06:56:51 PM

studebaker hoch: [img.fark.net image 464x261]

If only there was some way we could divide the territory up between the two countries.


no need to, they belong to japan. China is just being a petulant brat
 
2013-11-26 07:01:13 PM

TV's Vinnie: Of all the things to send over? B-52s? The planes that SAMs could easily shoot down since the 1960's? Yeah. The brass in Beijing are p*ssing themselves now, I bet.

How come Fatty Dingdongs in Best Korea can get a B2 show but all the Chinese get are Grampa's bombers?


Because the bombers were scheduled to take part in a routine exercise weeks before China very dubiously claimed sovereignty over that air space. We didn't fly them there for China's benefit (although we would if they wanted to make something of it). Sovereign coastal waters, after all, were originally whatever water you could cover with your cannons (later standardized at 3 miles, and still later extended to 12). China's now claiming it controls air space 200 MILES from its coastline. Part of exercising freedom of the seas is backing down bullies who want to write their own rules. We don't give notification when we fly through international air space, or travel through international waters.
 
2013-11-26 07:04:44 PM

Mr. Pokeylope: Evil Twin Skippy: Eddie Adams from Torrance: It's not like China can attack us.. we're their best customer.

It would like WalMart launching SCUDs against the local trailer park.

It's not like China could attack us... period. They have no strategic bombers that could reach us, their Navy would have to get past our Navy, our air force, and hell, some of our Army units. And that is prior to landing. (I imagine an A-10 or a Apache could really get the better of a troop transport that strayed close enough to land.)

Now, if they would like to duke this out with Nuclear weapons, they could hit us. Our retaliation would be terrible. Heck, we might not even retaliate with nukes. We'd bomb them into oblivion with conventional weapons just so we can drag their leaders through the streets and hang them.

I always though that the problem was actually Russia? Like, they would  step in if we got aggressive with China?


Once upon a time that was an issue.  However after mao the pun split with Russia over which country should rule the communist world/revolutionary junk it was more like Russia would split China with us.
/or something which is why Mac should nuked the chinese and we could have north and south china and no north korea
//according to a tinfoil hat history prof i had
 
2013-11-26 07:30:15 PM
zero to cave in 3...2...
 
Al!
2013-11-26 07:56:35 PM

mbillips: Cowthulu: Unarmed for a bomber like that means that the codes have not been uploaded and doesn't mean that the plane did not have any nuclear weapons onboard. It just means if the pilots wanted to they could not use the weapons.

B-52s don't routinely carry nukes. Just the SAC ones do, and there are few of those left.


If by "few" you mean "none," then you are correct.  Strategic Air Command ceased being way back in 1992.  Those aircraft are now under numerous commands: ACC, AMC, PAF, USAFE, AFGSC.  The nukes would primarily be taken care of by AFGSC aircraft, but I'd imagine there aren't any stipulations that ACC, USAFE and PAF aircraft aren't allowed to carry nukes.
 
2013-11-26 08:04:14 PM

KarmicDisaster: Oh yeah? Well, If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!


img.fark.net
 
2013-11-26 08:18:35 PM

zedster: nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work


sobchak.files.wordpress.com

/hot like an airborne reactor
 
2013-11-26 08:25:30 PM
China should repossess all those planes when the US gov't defaults in March.
 
2013-11-26 08:25:39 PM

WordsnCollision: zedster: nuclear bombers? really? We tried nuclear planes, they didn't work

[sobchak.files.wordpress.com image 850x515]

/hot like an airborne reactor


Well, technically, that wasn't nuclear powered.  They just flew a pretty much unshielded nuclear reactor around to see what would happen and stuff.
 
2013-11-26 09:03:24 PM
Where the fark u at stealth drone?
 
2013-11-26 09:14:30 PM
GratuityIncluded

Where the fark u at stealth drone?

Right next to the bombers.  ;)
 
2013-11-26 11:50:24 PM
 
2013-11-26 11:57:25 PM
Yea, when the Chinese fighters intercept the plane and force it to land so they can steal our technology get back to me. You know, like Bush did.

Otherwise, fark you subby.

If you don't know we keep B-52s loaded with nukes aloft at any time to prove to the jackasses we can obliterate their whole existence when they get stupid then you have no business commenting on this topic.

Dumbass.
 
2013-11-27 12:03:30 AM
Farking morons. Jesus is not coming back no matter how hard you try to create some retarded ass doomsday scenario.

Go back to farking you little sister and let us adults run the world.
 
2013-11-27 02:03:16 AM

Langdon_777: They upped the stakes with a navel fleet (on exercises) http://www.news.com.au/world/united-states-responds-to-chinese-air-id e ntification-zone-over-japanese-claimed-islands-by-sending-b-52-bombers /story-fndir2ev-1226769154950


JSDF will respond in kind, or at least shadow them, I'm sure.

China is well aware that Japan is under our nuclear umbrella, so it won't become an all-out shooting war, but probably some small skirmishes here and there.

Since it's really all about the gas/fishing/minerals/etc..., it most likely won't spiral out of control. Lot's of saber-rattling, but very limited hostilities. After all, it's hard to extract gas/minerals or fish, when you're constantly under attack.

/Their aircraft carrier is cute. I like the little ramp.
 
2013-11-27 02:15:47 AM

Hz so good: ladyfortuna: vpb: I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

Suddenly glad I haven't moved out of the semi-safe zone yet (yes, I actually checked the government projection maps).

Depending on how it all goes down, you might not want to survive it. There are fates worse than death.


Eh, I'll take my chances. Easy enough to end things later.
 
2013-11-27 03:04:13 AM

itazurakko: This text is now purple: China likely considers Okinawa to be Chinese.

As far as I know, they don't.

(But yeah Okinawa is part of Japan only fairly recently as the history of Japan goes... it's sort of "Japan's Hawaii" in a lot of ways.)


It's more confusing than that. Basically a bunch of pro-government researchers are trying to cast doubts on Japanese ownership of Okinawa, playing against native Ryukyuan displeasure with Tokyo, while advancing the dubsious and insane claim that because once, at some time hundreds of years ago, the Okinawans sent some gifts to China, the PRC owns Okinawa. But now there's an important general going on damage control and saying it isn't the case.

And that's not all! Just look at the next 60 years!
 
2013-11-27 05:55:26 AM

Kuroutesshin: itazurakko: This text is now purple: China likely considers Okinawa to be Chinese.

As far as I know, they don't.

(But yeah Okinawa is part of Japan only fairly recently as the history of Japan goes... it's sort of "Japan's Hawaii" in a lot of ways.)

It's more confusing than that. Basically a bunch of pro-government researchers are trying to cast doubts on Japanese ownership of Okinawa, playing against native Ryukyuan displeasure with Tokyo, while advancing the dubsious and insane claim that because once, at some time hundreds of years ago, the Okinawans sent some gifts to China, the PRC owns Okinawa. But now there's an important general going on damage control and saying it isn't the case.

And that's not all! Just look at the next 60 years!


China has also made noises about how much of North Korea is actually part of China, too. Absurd, of course.
 
2013-11-27 10:21:48 AM

Langdon_777: They upped the stakes with a navel fleet (on exercises) http://www.news.com.au/world/united-states-responds-to-chinese-air-id e ntification-zone-over-japanese-claimed-islands-by-sending-b-52-bombers /story-fndir2ev-1226769154950


I see they deployed their Soviet museum piece.
 
2013-11-27 10:46:15 AM
resources1.news.com.au

An American B-52 takes part in Operation Tin Roof Rusted over the East China Sea.
 
Al!
2013-11-27 05:26:17 PM

Degenz: Yea, when the Chinese fighters intercept the plane and force it to land so they can steal our technology get back to me. You know, like Bush did.

Otherwise, fark you subby.

If you don't know we keep B-52s loaded with nukes aloft at any time to prove to the jackasses we can obliterate their whole existence when they get stupid then you have no business commenting on this topic.

Dumbass.


Where do you people get this information?  Did you recieve a telegraph, or maybe a parcel via the Pony Express?  The USAF hasn't run an alert mission since the early 1990's.  They were a deterrent against the USSR, an entity that also ceased to exist at around the same time.  There just isn't the same scale of threat from any other nation, and the missions were hugely expensive  and very, very dangerous
 
Displayed 130 of 130 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report