Derek 2.0

I doubt they're too fond of Eastwood either.........

Wasn't the site by some guy named Larry the very same site you provided and used as supportive evidence that Bomber Command's "usual" loadout for bombing cities was comprised of 4000 lbs bombs? Inversely, didn't you also question globalsecurity.org's assessment of North Korean artillery? It appears that it’s actually you that cherry-picks..... Larry of course lists his sources as being various Commonwealth Air Force Associations and National Archives……….It appear Larry has done far more research then yourself.... Interesting indeed.......that you also cherry-pick this source........from the link: So your light cased, high capacity bomb "smashes through buildings".........great so why were "cookie" bombs not used in bombing concrete targets or still used today in such roles? Clearly said description seems fitting of a bomb with a thick steel casing which enables it to "smash through several floors"...........You really knocked that one out of the park So if a “larger blast” has more destructive force, why aren’t 4000 lbs light cased/HC bombs used today? Why would the mainstay of Western militaries, the mark 80 series, be medium cased/general purpose bombs? Your actual understanding of the anatomy of an explosion is wanting……. Actually no…….the initial (blast) energy released in both hands is equal, the energy in the open hand isn’t dissipated, but expanding (overpressure) and increasing atmospheric pressure. The initial (blast) energy in the closed hand is reflected back (from the closed hand) to the initial point of the blast (generating negative atmospheric pressure) and in turn generates a reflected impulse (Momentum conservation principle) 10-50 times (dependent on the elevation of the explosion) greater than the initial blast wave….The negative pressure and impulse is what will tear the hand to ribbons or demolish the concrete building………… As such, bomb explosions that are reflected from a thicker steel casing equate to a larger destructive force………the principle is the same with the firecracker, a stick of dynamite placed into a hole drilled into a rock versus the same stick placed on the outside surface of the rock, or a medium capacity bomb versus a high capacity bomb……..and is why Larry’s industrial demolition loadout for concrete targets contained MC bombs and is the reason why the vast majority of bombs dropped by modern militaries are medium capacity bombs………. I have to ask, did you skip high school science? And what was said quoted response of mine responding to? Shall we revisit? The above is your own statement correct? So you’re saying your 4000 lbs HC cookie would do more damage to a concrete structure (like what is found in Seoul) then a 500 lbs MC JDAM…….remember your firecrackers Thanks for coming out though.......

Bingo.....Though most modern aircraft have the ability to self-designate targets (sorta, kinda with the French Rafale and Eurofighter), the use of ground-based forward air controllers greatly improve the efficiency of modern air power……..The deployment of FACs and the CP-140s were part in parcel with the deployment of the Hornets……….IIRC, from the DND presser yesterday, 2/3rds of the bombs dropped by Canadian Hornets were located and designated by members of CANSOFCOM working with the Iraqi and Kurdish forces……. The reaction from the NDP is not a surprise, but the Liberals response is reminiscent of the Chrétien Government waxing over the actual fighting that took place in the FRY, in particular Medak pocket……well Canadian forces wore blue berets…….

No, you posted accounts of other people stating he said as much…….despite said stories being baseless, and in the case of the Katrina looters, running counter to historic fact as outlined by Kyle himself in his own book…….. Why would Kyle claim to be shooting looters, an act that would have been illegal and covered in great detail by the media (the real one, not Alex Jones) if it happened, when he was Iraq?

I'm not sure your point........Canada= Department of National Defense....USA= Department of Defense....UK= Ministry of Defense None the less, the J(M)SDF deployed forces to Iraq in 2004 and naval forces to the Indian Ocean during the GWOT........Perhaps this will help add factual perspective to your narrative/rant Would donating aid to refugees help/hinder ISIS in your view..........as to the intent of your post, it reads (to myself anyways) that the Japanese were unable to join the fight due to lack of a miltary, but instead dropped money instead of bombs to aid the anti-ISIS cabal.......and now two Japanese citizens have been captured as a direct result.

And I trust you have proof that Kyle did tell said stories, stories that would run counter to his actual published account of his time spent through late 2004 through 2005.......In Iraq and not New Orleans? I'm sorry that you trust internet fairy tales.

From reading the book and seeing the movie there were several instances of “artistic license” being invoked, likewise Copper’s portrayal of Kyle in several scenes appeared somewhat more remorseful then what is conveyed by Kyle himself in both his book and in interviews……..and of course, like any movie, “technical errors” that would be missed by most……..( I didn’t notice the plastic baby for instance until it was pointed out above)……..but in my opinion, the movie was close enough to the book given a book/story comprising his life was compressed into a 2 1/2 hour movie . I enjoyed it and would recommend it.

Because Mooney's retelling of Kyle's life was a compiling of “stories” told of Kyle by others and put together in several months after Kyle’s death…….Poor research and/or profiteering works for me. Alex Jonesish-federal government killing US citizens on US soil conspiracies aside, said “story” has been attributed to Kyle by “others”, despite Kyle being in Iraq (on his second tour) during the timeline in which the Katrina story takes place……….. Yeah I don’t believe the “story”, nor do I believe Kyle started/nor continued it what with his own book (that he wrote) countering it with historic fact of his actual second deployment to Iraq…….Sorry that you’ve fallen for several internet tales and memes attributed to him by the tin-foil hat wearing crowd……… But I heard Elvis, Jim Morrison and a clone of Micheal Jackson attended Kyle's funeral......

To clear up a few things on your narrative/rant….the Japanese do in fact have quite a large and modern military (that is not involved in the fight against ISIS), more importantly though is to make a distinction on the pledged $200 million from the Japanese government, which will be a contribution towards humanitarian aid, to be delivered in the various refugees camps full of those displaced by ISIS…..not in aiding the "anti-ISIS coalition"........

You mean a guy that put out a book about Kyle, after his death, claims Kyle confirmed the story to him? And "multiple sources say" Kyle was shooting looters in New Orleans after Katrina, even though Kyle was in Iraq, on his second tour, during Katrina......odd that story runs counter to Kyle's own retelling (in his actual book) of his time in Iraq............ But hey, its on the Internet, so it must be true

Where did I saw Ventura wasn't entitled to a "fair and equal application of the law"? Inversely, so is Kyle's widow...... Ahh but didn't you just suggest the Katrina/carjacking story was also in his book? Of course these stories were never repeated by Kyle, but were stories told about him by others........as said, and actually mentioned by Kyle in his actual book, Kyle was in Iraq during Katrina. You speak of stupid stories and falling for them, yet suggested said stories were in his book (likely because you read something online)......of which they were not.........likewise, Ventura's name wasn't in "black and white" in the book, the defamation case stemmed from later interviews (I watched the one with O'Reilly) in which Kyle identified Ventura as being one of the unnamed subjects (Scruffy Face) from his book.......

I take it you haven't read his book (I have and own a copy)..........and you know what, no mention of shooting looters during Katrina (well he was on his second tour in Fallujah) or fighting off carjackers at home......... And yes, the lawsuit against Kyle's estate is being appealed, that and the fact Jesse Ventura is involved, helps form my opinion.

I wonder how many widows donate money when they’re in legal battle with a person seeking millions to repair their already crackpot reputation………Of note, Kyle’s widow has or is about to appeal the case, I would assume in a differing venue then the State that Ventura once governed…

Why would they include “tales” associated with Kyle that “surfaced” and were attributed to Kyle, by others, after his death? AFAIK the carjacking rumor came about on “call in radio” after Kyle was killed, likewise Katrina rumours which came to surface from the lunatic fringe conspiracy crowd….Funny enough though, Kyle was in Iraq during Hurricane Katrina………. “Bullshit” Chris Kyle stories are just that……. *But I heard Kyle could shoot lasers from his eyes and fart bolts of lightning........its now on the internet, so it must be true.

It sounds like it did $90.2 million........If the local theater picks it up for IMAX, I'll go see it again.......also saw the trailers for the new Mad Max movie, that looks like one to see in 3D.

An interesting American perspective on the shared responsibility of Arctic defense of North America: And this projected model will also mimic the current North Warning System (which I had the "pleasure" experiencing for several months last year), with the Americans contributing assets in the Western/Alaskan region and us in the Central (Kitikmeot) and Eastern regions, bookended by a lesser extent with the Danes in Greenland…….it works with Air Defense, I’m sure it will work with maritime security. Also of note and related to this thread: So one could safely assume, in a decade ahead, the maritime security of North America will monitored by modern US and Canadian Coast Guard icebreakers, combined with modern Royal Canadian Navy ice-capable Arctic Patrol Vessels…….An area that our Superpower allies recognize we currently have a slight edge on in terms of technology and procurement. And of course, and I fully admit my initial skepticism with it, this Arctic strategy was brought about by the current Conservative Government.....

At some point they will be replaced, but for what will be expected of them once the AOPS enter full service, they will be more than sufficient for another decade+…….And I'm sure some will continue on like our old sweepers and auxillaries did until replaced by the Kingstons.

I'm sure some could be, but most of those crews have been used to address other manpower requirements in the fleet.

......yet the Kingston class already operates in the Arctic. I never said they would operate in the winter in the Arctic. They will be able to operate more of the year in the Arctic then the current Kingston class... The Kingstons were not built as "training ships"........ What requirement does the RCN have to go after fishing boats in the Arctic ice? Of course, the Government is replacing our current Coast Guard ice breaker fleet, well adding more capable patrol vessels to our navy......the problem is what exactly?

I'm not sure, 1/3rd is currently tied-up already....but putting a portion in reduced operating status will allow the fleet to continue without a major refit for decades.......I would expect some will be retained after the AOPS have entered service for dive support and route survey.....

That is a very astute point, and unlike larger urban forces with a ERT just a phone call away, such rural detachments are often on their own.......don't misunderstand me, I've no issues with the RCMP (or police in general) being armed with a carbine, and don't really know why the RCMP abandoned the issuing of carbines generations ago………

But the most important addition is the inclusion of a helicopter........with that, one AOPS will be able to cover more of our coastlines then 3-4 Kingstons can presently.

And this refutes what? Are you suggesting said loadout link doesn't define both the intended target types and the types of munitions used to target them? Did I suggest different? I'll ask again, and you'll dodge again, why were light cased/high capacity bombs not used on hardened concrete, if the initial blast was key to the destruction of said buildings? There is no "made-up" distinction between your HC blast bomb and MC/GP bombs (used to target concrete)......the distinction between the two starts with the name and expands like the initial blast wave from there But I thought the blast was used to destroy hard targets???........so why doesn't a larger blast equate to further destructive force against hard targets? By all means expand on how the left hand(MC/GP) magnifies the explosive force contrasted with the same firecracker in the right hand(HC).........I wouldn't want to misrepresent you. Once you can, then you'll be able to answer why your HC bombs were less effective against concrete when compared to a mc/gp bomb..........and in turn understand the difference between the loadouts for blast and industrial demolition. Then we can continue........I'll be waiting.

Your ignorance is noted.........how do you expect a BIG ICEBREAKER to "catch" smaller boats in the open water? Beached in winter? they will be used on all three of our coastlines, likewise their use in the Arctic won't be limited year round, unlike the current Kingstons, the AOPS will expand the upon the RCN's ability to operate in the North........but of course I fail to see why you feel the RCN needs BIG ICEBREAKERS to "catch" fishing boats in the Arctic ice

I hate to interrupt your ta-da, but you stated I said there were no defined terms in said loadout link……and your proof is quoting me speaking to defined terms….impressive. I already did several posts prior. So a bomb designed to amplify blast was unable to destroy hardened concrete............how could that be? Ain't science a bitch Magnified?!?!?!?! A human hand can magnify the explosive potential (and it turn the blast) of a firecracker???? Astounding!!!! Take a mulligan and get back to me once you've wikied a better understanding, then we'll explore why your light case/high capacity bombs were less effective against concrete then medium cased bombs........or HE artillery shells.