South African Reacts to: 5 Reasons Why You Shouldn`t Mess With AMERICA

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น •

  • @ryan_lloyd
    @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Hey folks! Thanks for watching! If you enjoyed this video, make sure to subscribe to the channel as I’m uploading similar videos to this every single day! 😄

  • @lowellarnett3172
    @lowellarnett3172 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    It tickles me when they say the raptor looks like a bumble bee on radar, I imagine, "Sir, there is a bumble bee entering our airspace at 1200 knots!"

  • @debbers
    @debbers 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Hey Ryan,
    How are you doing?
    I loved watching and listening to you during this video!
    I'll be watching, I love your reactions!

  • @iknowuare4716
    @iknowuare4716 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Much love from the U.S.A and glad to know South Africa is one of our allies.

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Much love!! Welcome to the channel :)

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The people seem to be, but the government is part of BRICS 🤷‍♀️. Still loved my visit to South Africa and the reactors that I follow from South Africa.

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Ever heard of BRICS? I loved my visit to South Africa. Was quite in awe visiting Johannesburg coming from Dakar, Senegal, quite a culture shock, it was like I was back in the States. I have great memories from visiting, I got to pet lion cubs, which was awesome! I follow a couple South African reactors that support the US, but I wouldn't say government wise that South Africa are allies.

  • @christopherjon1245
    @christopherjon1245 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    There is a video called “cities at sea how aircraft carriers work” it’s about 10 min. You should react

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Thanks for the suggestion! I’ll check it out for sure! :)

  • @macdadstromboli2762
    @macdadstromboli2762 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Another reason is how many Americans own guns. I personally own almost 40 in total alone. There are people that have hundreds of guns.

    • @beeg56
      @beeg56 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ...as well as a *LOT* of us without any guns at all.✌

  • @Beans-1111
    @Beans-1111 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Thank you so much for caring so much about our military!

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      No problem! I hope America’s military stays strong for all of the years to come!

    • @Beans-1111
      @Beans-1111 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@ryan_lloyd We are always thinking into the future and never giving up. We are always extremely fast thinkers! If we nerd something in a hurry we will make it.

  • @jamesgirard1090
    @jamesgirard1090 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I know a couple drone operators. They operate from a base in Michigan, and can wage war on the other side of the globe. Go home to dinner with their families.I find that amazing

  • @kokomo9764
    @kokomo9764 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    There are far more than 1 million people in the military.
    Actually, am aircraft carrier can hold 100 aircraft in wartime. But only carries 70 in peace time. So, in peace time there are 770 planes. The US Airforce is the largest in the world. but the US Navy is the second largest Air Force in the world.

  • @generichardson4771
    @generichardson4771 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    ie you havent yet checkout the fat electrition why the F15 is the most gangster plane in the world

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for the reminder. I have it on the list. Definitely want to do that reaction this week :)

  • @ZapRowsdower47
    @ZapRowsdower47 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    PROUD TO BE
    🇺🇸 MURICAN!!! 💪🏽🇺🇸

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      🇺🇸 🇺🇲

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      RIP Toby Keith a true blooded American

  • @queencerseilannister3519
    @queencerseilannister3519 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Love from the usa!!

  • @MarvRoberts
    @MarvRoberts 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    England picked on us in the 1770s and early 1800s. We said 'Never again!', for us or anyone else, tossed up two middle fingers and adopted FA&FO as our national attitude. We have farmers, musicians, doctors, lawyers, etc. that have driven Abrams tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and have repelled out of Blackhawk helicopters. We have neurosurgeons who flew F-15 eagles. We have nuclear engineers in the middle of nowhere/Oak Ridge, Tennessee....etc.,etc.,etc.

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      And we prevailed because the colonies were armed, hence why the forefathers added the 2nd amendment to the constitution, the Brits wanted to take colonials arms away after giving them the guns to protect their land. Remove a person's right to protect themselves. Most recent time we've seen removing fire arms with the biggest death count, 40s with Hitler taking guns from the people.

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Everyone needs to watch Innocents Betrayed

  • @mikebalzano2108
    @mikebalzano2108 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is an older video, there’s actually a lot more than 5 reasons that weren’t covered. One is the official announcement of the Space Force that was publicly announced in 2019 by the president so you can just imagine what they might have that nobody would know about. There’s been quite a lot of launches to outer space by the Space Force in the past few years not to mention all the many other things that would actually make any video just way too long.

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      And they only give out info of what they're willing to tell people, just like Russia and China

  • @gregorywright2798
    @gregorywright2798 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    But don't forget that there are 300 million guns and rifles that the civilians Own. Also, that is one Reason why Admiral Yamamoto Never attacked mainland United States during the war, because he said behind every blade of grass will be a gun!

  • @beeg56
    @beeg56 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This was as of 2017.
    What the Pentagon was willing to tell the world in 2017.
    Americans know -- and the rest of you guys ought to as well -- that the crazy stuff under development (and there's *always* crazy stuff under development) isn't being talked about. Yet.
    🌻

  • @gregorywright2798
    @gregorywright2798 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Just think, the United States had stealth aircraft twenty years before any other country.

  • @gregorywright2798
    @gregorywright2798 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    We need to watch Seven bad Ass Aircraft of Americans Military

  • @randieandjodistrom854
    @randieandjodistrom854 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Not only does the US spend more on the military than any other country, but spends more on the military than the next 9 nations combined (China, Russia,, India, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Germany, France, South Korea and Japan). Money matters. Again, not only does the United States have the largest aircraft carrier fleet in the world, but it's larger than the next 9 nations combined if you're just looking at numbers, but size and quality matters--the combined deck space of the US aircraft carriers is twice that of ALL other nation's carriers combined. With respect to nuclear capabilities--I served in the United States Air Force for 30 years, and much of my career was directly related to nuclear operations and capabilities, including as the senior missile combat crew member at the largest Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) base in the free world. There are few who understand nuclear capabilities and warfare as well as I. I could write a book on this topic (and probably will at some point), but here's the bottom line--when it comes to nuclear weapons, the number of weapons isn't the most important metric. The most important metric is how many nuclear weapons can be reliably and accurately delivered to a specific target at any given point in time. I can't go into more specifics, but, be assured--there is no close second to the US, and US policies, backed up by capabilities, would greatly diminish the effect of a nuclear strike by any one, or any combination of nations. Every country knows that starting a nuclear war would be national suicide (with the SOLE exception of the US), and as such, there's absolutely no advantage to even considering such a thing. So, based on my knowledge and perspective--no worries mate. The focus of the US military on PGM demonstrates the intent, if warfare is necessary, to be precise in taking out targets with the absolute minimum of collateral damage. To summarize, no nation on earth in all of history has had the capability to dominate the world as does the United States of America today, and the fact that the US has not pursued this is de facto evidence that this is not the desire or intent of the United States, as this is contrary to the very foundation of the US as a country. The United States was established with the belief that it is best for all peoples and nations to engage in free trade, and the US has dedicated itself to trying to maintain a stable world environment where nations can freely and safely engage in trade with each other, and God willing, that will always be the case.

  • @sandilar
    @sandilar 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    You hafta win the ppl... I think

  • @bowches
    @bowches 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    It's amazing how the Taliban withstood against the American military and also Vietnam 😂

    • @Steve-gx9ot
      @Steve-gx9ot 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      USA presence in Viet Nam was to SLOW Spread of communism which usa power groups never want! = simple truth

    • @morgankuikka4940
      @morgankuikka4940 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Its very easy to "stand against" a massive enemy army when using gorilla tactics, and running all your operations out of neighboring coubtries, not wearing uniforms, using civillians as human shields, ect while the large army is being restrained by so much red tape they cant even defend themselfs without written permission from both god and satan signed in triplicate.

    • @joelrook5563
      @joelrook5563 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Politics, that's how. The U.S. Military itself didn't lose those wars. It was all politics. Probably because the U.S. Shouldn't have even been there in the context it was. That in and of itself is a much larger debate. But if you look at most U.S. Involved battles (outside of WW II) you will see a huge disparity of casualties in overwhelming favor of U.S. Even when ridiculously outnumbered.

    • @bowches
      @bowches 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @joelrook5563 they kind of did lose....they didn't achieve their objective which was to eliminate the Taliban/vietnam cong. It was a stalemate at worst.

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We never should've involved ourselves to begin with, all of it was for political gain and power at the expense of the US people. I respect the troops that served but don't respect the government that sends US military to fight for their political gain, power and wealth

  • @zevynozevyn4102
    @zevynozevyn4102 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Buddy your math is wrong we have 11 carriers that hold 70 aircraft a piece that 770 aircraft not 170.

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Hey! I think it must just be my accent haha. At 5:40 I did say “Seven hundred and seventy”. It might have just sounded like I said 170 haha

    • @zevynozevyn4102
      @zevynozevyn4102 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@ryan_lloyd your good 👍😊 luv ya bruv.

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      US Air Force has the largest Air Force, the US Army has the 2nd largest, then the Russian Air Force followed by the US Navy

  • @greggwilliamson
    @greggwilliamson 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    A very informative video about US Aircraft Carriers is "Cities at Sea, How Aircraft Carriers Work". What he didn't say is that the US has 11 "Supercarriers". We also have 10 Amphibious Assault Carriers which embark about 35 F-35s each. Over 1000 warplanes just on US Navy Carriers alone.

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks for the suggestion. This is definitely a video I want to check out!

  • @Steve-gx9ot
    @Steve-gx9ot 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Just curious = how old are you?
    and did you have wood watching this?
    Not sure why you made this video, but for personal gratufication only
    No use to us

    • @ryan_lloyd
      @ryan_lloyd  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for watching! :)

    • @joelrook5563
      @joelrook5563 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Maybe no use to you, but your click and comment adds to his algorithm, so you are of use to him. Nice job :)

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@joelrook5563helps the algorithm, not sure what Steve was talking about

  • @marclandreville6367
    @marclandreville6367 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Russian Defense Minister Shoigu said that Russia did not need aircraft carriers, but only missiles to destroy them; they have hypersonic missiles to do that, the US does not. Aircraft carriers are meant to project power over countries too weak to put up much of a resistance, just like British gun boat diplomacy to intimidate resistance to the British Empire: they are now obsolete and sitting ducks against Russian and Chinese hypersonic missiles. The US military has failed to achieve required recruitment goals in the last few years so, for example, they can fully crew only 4 carrier battle groups. US steath aircraft were designed to spoof millimeter wave radar; none of the designers thought of 50's and 60's era VHF and UHF radars that are able to detect them; Russian long range survaillance radar still have multi band capability and are still able to detect the US stealth aircraft. That's why the F35 is a lemon: it sacrificed speed and manoeuvrability in order to promote stealth that it's not; It's fat and stubby because carries its stores internally and not exteriorily, and only goes Mach 1.6, against russian interceptors that can do Mach 2.8 and above (MiG-31) and those that are fast and highly manoeuvrable (SU-35). Then, they are so expensive that the US and allies will be reluctant to risk them in a real war, especially in the strike role, because you can't build a 300 million dollar replacement airplane in a couple of weeks.

    • @trevor21241842
      @trevor21241842 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I hope you continue thinking like that 😆 makes our job easier

    • @joelrook5563
      @joelrook5563 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yeah no kidding haha

    • @TexArizocan
      @TexArizocan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Wow Putin has released that information? The Pentagon has a plan for if the Zombie apocalypse happens. Pretty sure the US has plans for anything Putin does.

    • @hotrod7934
      @hotrod7934 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      🤦‍♂️🤭🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • @jojorice1705
    @jojorice1705 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    11 x 70 = 770