Originally posted by Shotgun:Well, if we run out of land, even after reclaiming, our air bases may have to shrink. Besides, you ever wondered why fuel prices are sky high?
I honestly can't think of a good reason why its so. Its not like we are running out of oil.
you are wrong if u think it this is so...oil will finished in 50 years or less...
NDPfreak, I really think you should heed kotay's advice and do some research before telling others here that they are WRONG. A lot of people here are at least twice your age and professionals engaged in a diversity of fields.
The supply of oil is there. The current fuel prices we see are in no way related to the lack of supply. Even OPEC's chief blames speculators for the current fuel prices.
Seriously, they will ALWAYS tell you oil is running out. Imagine what would happen to oil prices if they started to reveal their actual estimated reserves and it was to show that Oil will not run out this century?
They will always give inaccurate estimates of oil reserves.
They will always tell you oil is running out (which is true, but to what extent?).
Originally posted by Shotgun:NDPfreak, I really think you should heed kotay's advice and do some research before telling others here that they are WRONG. A lot of people here are at least twice your age and professionals engaged in a diversity of fields.
The supply of oil is there. The current fuel prices we see are in no way related to the lack of supply. Even OPEC's chief blames speculators for the current fuel prices.
Seriously, they will ALWAYS tell you oil is running out. Imagine what would happen to oil prices if they started to reveal their actual estimated reserves and it was to show that Oil will not run out this century?
They will always give inaccurate estimates of oil reserves.
They will always tell you oil is running out (which is true, but to what extent?).
Come on, I'm sure all of us have studied Geography in ur secondary school life... And if u don't know that oil is decreasing in numbers... Then I think that ur Geog. teacher is a failure...
Originally posted by NDPfreak:Come on, I'm sure all of us have studied Geography in ur secondary school life... And if u don't know that oil is decreasing in numbers... Then I think that ur Geog. teacher is a failure...
Yes we have all studied Geography in Secondary School ... but nobody's Geography teacher is a failure. Firstly, at secondary school level they just don't have the time to go into the depth required to give you a complete understanding of things. Secondly, they are only teaching you geography not economics or finance.
Do dwell on the thought that those of us who are older than you have also studied Economics and Finance in University. As part of our daily life, many of us even read the newspapers, journals and various other online resources on world affairs ... not just computer games.
What you have to understand is that your Point of View from Geography alone represents one side of the story. Events around the world are much more complicated than that and are never truly affected by just ONE factor alone ... such as the dwindling oil supplies you are referring to.
Please give others the benefit of the doubt that they could be right and that you are wrong. Hear what others have to say, go do some research to double check what they are saying before you even attempt to contradict them.
I'll help you out here by doing the searching for you. Here's a link to report talking about what Shotgun was referring to ...
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE24Dj02.html
seriously, you are either really only 16 years old and being a typical teenager ... or you are masquerading as a 16 year old and trolling ... either of which aren't very attractive.
Originally posted by OldBird69:NDPfreak, technically battleships don't exist anymore. The last one was USS Missouri, decommissioned in 1992 (you can visit it at Pearl Harbor).
Singapore, including RSN is VERY well-armed for its size. Only 9 countries operate aircraft carriers (not helicopter carriers) of some sort - US, Russia, Brazil, Spain, UK, France, Italy, India and Thailand. Ignoring Thailand (because their aircraft carrier is almost never used), the poorest of these 9 countries operating carriers, India, has a GDP that is ~7 times ours [India's GDP is US$1,098 billion, S'pore's GDP of $161 billion, source: IMF figures for 2007). Even a country like Australia, with GDP >5 times ours gave up their aircraft carriers over a decade ago. S. Korea, with 6 times our GDP has only LPDs.
Aside from S'pore not needing this type of long distance force projection, carriers require a task force to protect and supply ships to replenish/refuel ($$$) and in order to ensure having an operational carrier at any moment, you actually need more than one carrier, because the ship needs maintenance/upgrades/retrofit (or else you enemy can attack you when your ship is the dock). I think everyone can see in the case of Thailand, their carrier, HTMS Chakri Naruebet is pretty much a white elephant. Let's not repeat their mistake.
HTMS Chaukri Narubert is not an aircraft carrier. It is classified as an offshore patrol helicopter carrier. http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/chakrinaruebet/.
However, while I agree that RSN lacks the manpower to operate a supercarrier and there is no need for it to operate one, operating a helicopter carrier would be ideal. A 20000 ton vessel which can accomodate 10++ attack helicopters or a few VTOL aircrafts and support an amphibious task force will allow RSN to do limited force projection. Currently the 4 Endurance LSTs more or less fulfil this role though but it will be good to have a helicopter carrier. Can also serve as the flagship of RSN. No battleships fantasy, NDPfreak!! Aircraft carriers have replaced battleships as the capital ships in modern naval warfare!
Originally posted by student 17:
C'mon........we have problems even trying to man the frigates.
Those of you still keen on reading up on the oil situation..this month's Foreign Policy has an interview with Fatih Birol, the International Energy Agency chief economist.
Originally posted by Shotgun:NDPfreak, I really think you should heed kotay's advice and do some research before telling others here that they are WRONG. A lot of people here are at least twice your age and professionals engaged in a diversity of fields.
The supply of oil is there. The current fuel prices we see are in no way related to the lack of supply. Even OPEC's chief blames speculators for the current fuel prices.
Seriously, they will ALWAYS tell you oil is running out. Imagine what would happen to oil prices if they started to reveal their actual estimated reserves and it was to show that Oil will not run out this century?
They will always give inaccurate estimates of oil reserves.
They will always tell you oil is running out (which is true, but to what extent?).
You can sit there to say how many oil there is from your geography book !!!
But the price is sky high, you want it - buy at that price !!! You think people give you subsidies - because you got aircraft carrier ? or because your geography book say there is no shortage ?
Originally posted by storywolf:You can sit there to say how many oil there is from your geography book !!!
But the price is sky high, you want it - buy at that price !!! You think people give you subsidies - because you got aircraft carrier ? or because your geography book say there is no shortage ?
Well, you are right in one thing, if oil prices are high, it really doesn't matter that it shouldn't be. We lan lan still have to pay.
But like I said, land reclamation would still be our priority. And who knows, they maybe able to find some other way to maintain a credible air force with minimal land usage?
The problem with oil is that, is that there are so many conflicting views about it. Some scientists say we are running out faster than expected, some say that using "proven" reserves to estimate how much oil we really have left is inaccurate.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4681935.stm -- How much oil do we really have?
From the way the oil prices are headed... if not managed properly, it really might be heading for a crash. And yes, it seems like "pigs are gonna fly." I remember TIME magazine once saying that, if OPEC does decide to increase its output, it might throw oil prices into a downward spiral. That is against the interest of MANY oil giants as well...
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Unfortunately it wasn't the smartest thing to do... seriously how much damage did their super battleships do?
the reaso nwhy they didn't do much more damage was due to a mistaken thought that they were facing halsey's carriers...
there was no radio communication between kurita and ozawa in his carriers... hence kurita still thought that halsey was in Leyte Gulf... plus the fact that the seventh fleet was also near led him to pull back...
what he didn't know as that the seventh fleet battleships had run out of ammo and halsey was not at Leyte Gulf... if kurita had continued steming in, he would have caught the americans with their pants down...
i do agree that battleships and carriers are not for singapore... but it does look cool...