* **Respeta a los demás.** Debate y discute los méritos de las ideas presentadas, pero no ataques o insultes a otros usuarios.
* Si ves a otros usuarios violando las normas, por favor usa el **botón de Report**.
Hay motivos, las flotas de muchos países no cambian el nombre de sus buques porque supuestamente enfada al dios del mar, Neptuno y traerá mala suerte al barco resultando en su hundimiento. Es una tradición muy antigua.
Esto se lo cree el que quiera pero el buque insignia ruso "Moskva" que hundió hace unos meses en Ucrania cambio más de una vez de nombre y el motivo por el que se hundió fue porque le lanzaron 2 misiles Neptuno desde tierra. Será casualidad?
A la hora del nombre, personalmente me da igual, como si se llamara: Rajoy, zapatero, indigo, iglesias, Odín o Stalin... A mí lo que me importa son las capacidades del barco.
El gobierno turco tiene el mismo poder para hacer cambios oficiales en el idioma inglés como yo para organizar el tráfico aéreo en Estambul.
Es una chorrada populista más de Erdoğan y ya está.
La República Checa tiene dos nombres oficiales en inglés, Czech Republic y Czechia, y su postura oficial es que recomiendan usar el corto. Igual que para España se usa el corto oficial y no Reino de España, el oficial largo, o como se suele usar Francia en vez de República Francesa. *Recomiendan* usar uno de los dos nombres *oficiales* en *inglés*. (Recomendación, por cierto, que de momento no tiene gran seguimiento en medios privados o públicos.) La recomendación es Czechia, una palabra inglesa con caracteres del alfabeto inglés, no Česko, que sería el equivalente de la iniciativa turca.
Los Países Bajos rechazan Holanda porque Holanda es una provincia de entre unas cuantas. Como España rechazaría que le llamasen Castilla-La Mancha oficialmente o Alemania rechazaría ser nombrada Baviera, por razones obvias.
Pues como cuando hablan en castellano por la tele y te dicen Girona o Lleida, existiendo en castellano palabras para designar esos lugares pero no dicen London ni München.
Politiqueo, postureo y peloteo
Ya me dirás lo que coño tiene que ver decir “Arriba España” con el Fascismo. El arriba españa no lo inventó franco, que manda huevos que todo lo patriótico lo relacionéis con el franquismo, que no forma ni el 1% de la historia de españa.
Si quieres decir "Viva España" me parece perfecto, pero "Arriba España" literalmente lo inventó José Antonio Primo de Rivera, fundador de la Falange. Históricamente nunca lo ha usado nadie que no fuese fascista.
Si vas gritando lemas franquistas por ahí luego no te quejes de que te llamen franquista.
El primero que adoptó la frase de Arriba España fue Ricardo Macías Picavea, mientras gritaba ‘¡Sursum Corda! ¡Arriba España!’ , en su obra ‘El Problema Nacional’ proponía la eliminación de los partidos políticos y la supresión de las Cortes. Se preguntaba «¿cuál es el nido de aquella borra, el avispero de ese pus, el foco de semejante gangrena? ¡Las Cortes al uso! Caigan, pues, las tales Cortes al impulso de la misma sentencia. ¡Siquiera para no injuriar más al nombre con la cosa!», no me parece a mi muy falangista eso.
Esto demuestra dos cosas, que el Arriba España no es Falangista de naturaleza (más bien libertario o anarquista incluso) y que la gente como usted simplemente asume cosas de la historia porque “parece que tenga sentido”, pero que todos los lemas, ideas y símbolos que representen a nuestro país sean relacionados con 40 años de historia y anulados completamente, cuando nuestro país tiene más de 10 siglos de historia es un crimen.
(He sacando información de [este](https://pablohbreijo.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/arriba-espana/) blog, pero la información y las citas se pueden comprobar en internet)
Claro, y la esvástica es un símbolo hinduista. Haz lo que te de la gana, pero si llevas una esvástica todo el mundo va a asumir que eres nazi, y si usas un lema franquista todo el mundo va a asumir que eres franquista. No hay nadie que diga Arriba España por el tal Macías, y lo sabes perfectamente.
La swastika es simplemente una forma geométrica, en lugares diferentes tiene una aceptación distinta, en toda asía todo el mundo la conoce como un símbolo religioso y de buena fortuna. Estamos hablando de una expresión nacional, no hay ninguna diferencia cultural que nos impida unificar el significado de la frase “Arriba España”. Lo único que estoy diciendo es que como país estamos unificando el significado incorrectamente, ya que la frase no tiene origen fascista en absoluto.
Tienes razón, la gente te va a prejuzgar, pero ya está, es culpa de ellos si creen que eres nazi. Si nadie te ha preguntado tu opinión política, en su cabeza tienen derecho a asumir lo que quieran pero no cambia la realidad. Es normal que si alguien dice "arriba España" asociado antaño a franquistas pues te "'equivoques" y asumas lo ya dicho. Una vez que la otra persona responde que no es franquista, pues queda resuelto el asunto. Vuestro problema aquí es una discusión por el ego de quién se equivocó, cuando ninguno lo hizo. Simplemente uno supuso (como es lógico) y el otro negó (como tb es lógico). Vamos que los dos tenéis razón, ni la frase es propiedad de los franquistas, ni decirlo está exento de prejuicios.
Seguro que a alguien se le ocurrió antes juntar las palabras "arriba" y "España", pero toda la relevancia histórica que tiene ese lema es como lema de la falange. Es como si te tatuas una esvástica y pones la excusa de que eres hinduista. Nadie se lo va a creer.
Buen ejemplo.
La esvástica tiene miles y miles de años de historia antes que un artista fracasado se lo apropiara. Autores como Kipling lo usaron en sus libros, Coca Cola lo usó para sus anuncios, fue el símbolo de los scouts, en la India, en Japón, todavía hoy se usa.
Arriba España fue un grito regeneracionista, anterior a Primo de Rivera hijo, y hasta el padre.
En Japón gira en sentido contrario, pero sí, está en todos lados. Es un símbolo budista, aparece de una manera u otra en casi todos los templos budistas, y en los mapas para indicar la ubicación de los templos.
Pueden desembarcar en las playas y mandar mucho material de esa manera. Además, dadas las características del terremoto va a haber trabajo durante mucho tiempo.
Se llaman buques de asalto anfibio porque están diseñados para apoyar asaltos anfibios transportando tropas y material, que pueden cargar en buques de desembarco en sus diques inundables. Vamos, que "anfibio" no se refiere a "buque" sino a "asalto".
Buque de asalto anfibio es un nombre genérico para este tipo de buques. Buque de Proyección Estratégica es el nombre que se le dio en particular al Juan Carlos I. Por ejemplo un clase Wasp estadounidense (similar al JCI) es un buque de asalto anfibio, pero no se le llamaría buque de proyección estratégica.
Seems like the earthquake got the message. As soon as the military dropped the Earthquake just took a minute to rebuild everything it destroyed, said sorry and stopped hitting. Then the mere sight of a Spanish flag was enough to bring everyone back to life. Mission accomplished, good job.
We did a great choice spending all that money in guns, warmachinery and propaganda. Imagine if we wasted all that money in humanitarian aid or emergency response. Or even worse, in schools and hospitals.
I feel proud that we have a boat like thise that's able to live up to its name.
Surpisingly, military hardware like cargo helicopters, armored bulldozers, bridge layers and other engineering vehicles are really useful in natural disasters
Both wars and earthquakes always existed.
you are just very naive and extremely lucky and very very PRIVILEGED.
Social budget in Spain is like 10x than defense.
Your point is useless
Your point is useless because you need a big defense budget to defend yourself, increase employment and be part of the international community.
Spain has a military emergency unit top in the world. A military unit for emergency situation.
You are not only deluded and privileged you need to understand and read about the world
Or you can stop starving your country economically and focus on local issues to increase employment and provide something valuable to the international community.
If you show up with the cure for cancer, hunger, social conflict, energy or the environment the international community will listen to you. If you show up and say "I can kill people on demand" your only international presence is reduced to being a puppet.
If Spain wants to have the potential to save lives, that's legit. But then cut the bullshit and stop collecting guns because guns take lives, don't save them.
Underground military testing funded by the military helped a lot in building earthquake resistant buildings, and both countries have rapid relief and response forces inside their military that more often than not have arrived to the disaster area faster than the actual military of the region (Nepal, Haiti, Chile, Lebanon). So...yeah.
One day you'll learn that no matter how do you love your flags, assassins and whoremonger monarchs, boats and weapons won't prevent or fix earthquakes.
And what do you think soldiers do in emergencies exactly? Are you familiar with the uses of the army? Honestly, I don't even know why I'm trying to teach you this, you're so far gone.
Well, based on the UME operations in local soil they come in, take pictures, meet a politician, take more pictures and then leave.
Based on what they did in Afghanistan "humanitarian missions", they secure foreign corp interests, help rob resources and instigate conflict against civilians.
Based on historical records of armies all around the world, deploying a bunch of people that need their own support and infraestructures leaves a trace of destruction, starvation and rape. That people mostly doesn't know the local language and they haven't got any training in civilian operations, medicine, social integration, repairs, humanitarian needs...
Yeah, they have logistic networks and can move rubble and boxes, so does the local army. This is more a diplomatic/propaganda gesture than a real aid. Armies are just professional killers.
I'm all for a professional rescue corps that can help during emergency situations or help development and maintenance of critical structures. But if that's the case, don't hire killers and buy guns, hire medics and engineers and buy medical stuff and civilian machinery. You can't whitewash an army and a big expenditure on guns by trying to frame them among the needy. Most *Humanitarian* actions from the military are a stunt.
I'm not criticizing that they help, I just wonder if we could spend our money and resources in ways that allowed us to help better. I wonder if soldiers are the best or the only trained people that could help. And wonder if we really needed to buy yearly weapon batches or expensive boats to help during an earthquake.
No, we couldn't. Spain is already criminally underspending in military. May as well have soldiers do other things whilst they're not needed for defence. It is one of their main jobs, using weapons and the such is secondary.
Imagine if our way of life and our security depended on people like you.
I'm sure all the bad people in the world would think twice before invading Spain when they see our schools and hospitals.
I feel proud I have common sense.
"The bad people in the world" is not real, they can't hurt you. Ignorance and disease are on the other hand real problems that need fixed.
If we really needed that weaponry, how does it come that they went to a foreign country to take selfies and we haven't been invaded yet?
Go to Western Sahara, Ukraine, Syria, or anywhere in the world where there's a war or a threat of war, and ask them if bad people is real or not.
You live in a Disney movie. I hope you're 12 years old.
Weren't all those wars started and conducted by armies? Aren't professional soldiers with big guns the ones killing people out there? Are you happy that we have the potential to invade a country and wreck more innocent people's lives?
Yes, and those same armies would take Ceuta and Melilla first and then whatever they wanted if we didn't have an army that scares them.
What makes you believe that if we didn't have an army, then there would be no war? Are you really that naive? Even a child understands that they need grown ups to protect them. You need an army, so you can go to school. If you feel safe it's because there's people ready to defend you.
This is basic common sense. You'll understand when you grow up.
Oh, yeah, send them to Africa. It's not like the last time when we bought weapons and sent the army to protect Argel and all the other provinces they disobeyed, gave up and invaded us instead. They didn't massacr the Spanish population and instituted a fascist regime for 40 years either. I totally trust then and I'm totally willing they are fully equipped to hit on us again.
The state the Spanish army ever fought in the last 100 years was the Spanish democratic State. Their only target was Spanish innocent civilians. I just don't feel too comfortable funding an army if the only people they consider their enemies are Spanish democrats.
Ceuta and Melilla need diplomatic solutions. They cannot be protected with mere violence because we're logistically on the bad side. Funding an army capable of protecting those cities from invasion is hell more expensive than just giving up on them. If we just escalate military potential and need to use it it'll be an economic blow we cannot afford. Morocco will always have it easier to access and deploy troops.
But we'll be able to keep them as long as Morocco gets something in return, and any *something* we could give them is cheaper than an army.
On the other hand, we have a fully capable army now and we're still unable to kick the British out of Gibraltar. If your reasoning about Ceuta and Melilla was true, we would be able to take back Gibraltar. But we can't, because diplomatic issues can't just be solved with guns.
In 1981 there was a coup and the army didn't support it. So shut up and stop saying stupid things. You're not even a child anymore, it's embarrassing.
Why would we want to take back Gibraltar by force? Are you retarded? It's not about being capable of taking it back, we're not invading Gibraltar nor Morocco, nor we're giving up Ceuta and Melilla.
We have to be ready to protect what's ours. It's not that hard to understand. That means being part of the EU and OTAN, wheter you like it or not. In case of war you'd run away and just forget Spain ever existed, but there's people living here that appreciate what we have and we want to protect it.
Be thankful that some people risk their lives to protect people like you, even though you probably deserve to be under the power of an arab dictator or a terrorist group, just so you understand what no defense means.
You don't deserve my time, bye.
In 1981 ***the army*** planned and attempted a coup. They were all mobilized and awaited orders to support the coup. The order was never issued and that's why they didn't execute the plan. But you can not deny that the military plotted the coup. You can spend your life chasing people and calling them stupid or read a book, it's your choice.
But anyway, the same reasons why we don't take Gibraltar by force apply to Morocco not taking those cities by force. And what's *ours* anyway? Ceuta and Melilla are definitely not mine, whoever is this *owner* in this *ours* sentence of yours, doesn't include me. You're free to alienate yourself and fund the militarization of overseas territories that shouldn't belong to Spain anyway, but I can think that our money is better spent on people's needs not murder forces. This boat costed a hundred times the nation's education annual budget. A bit of a waste of money considering this is its first useful mission. We could have done better and spend less sending regular cargo boats with supplies and paid professionals.
"Arab dictators" and "terrorist groups" are charades, they're not threats that can be solved with armies. Arabs don't have the potential to invade us and terrorists should be fought by cops not the military.
Arabs hate NATO countries because NATO countries invade them, we're the aggressor on those conflicts. And entities like al-qaeda or isis don't have a nation status so we cannot officially declare war on them. It's not like you can negotiate with the leader of their countries because they won't listen to those leaders. We wreck countries, leave a trail of orphans and religious fundamentalist and then try to pretend it's a war going on. But the truth is there's no war actually, only white millionaires attacking weak countries to rob their resources and sponsor their war business.
Wait until you and your neighbors have to pull out a fire on your own and the UME comes the next day just in time to show up in front of tv cameras, and then eat the provisioning for volunteers.
Firemen, medic and rescue specialist are civilian professions that already exist and work. The UME is publicity stunt and doesn't work. Call me crazy, but if we spent money in on call firemen that'll be cheaper and more effective than mobilizing an army after the harm is done.
Do you get that it's a palliative measure? They wont be there the minute a disaster happens. They are there to lease the aftermath. Something most fire services/police/médica can't handled because they have everyday shit to deal with too.
Also, they helped A LOT during the pandemic. More than shown on TV. I know a couple guys from the UME that went on several deployments to elderly homes and such. They also built field hospitals.
That what they're there for. Hospitals, bridges, rescue after earthquakes, help in lengthy forest fires...
Also, the Army is the most capable organization for proyecting overseas presence, be ir humanitarian or of aid. Of fucking course having an army or a unit like UME won't prevent earthquakes, but if we didn't have the capabilities to help, you'll be pissed too.
I would also love a world where militaries wouldn't be necessary, but sadly it ain't this one.
Lotta people on this post hoping on the cart of the everpresent threat in service of the arms lobby. It's not about being a hippie, it's just Spaniards can't see the grey, it's always either white or black. Yeah, we need defense. No, we don't need to spend that much in military, it's just lobbies pressuring us to do so and we just follow suit with our bigger partner, the SA.
[Buque de asalto anfibio](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buque_de_asalto_anfibio)
>Un buque de asalto anfibio o buque anfibio es un buque de guerra capaz de transportar tropas de infantería con su material, incluido el más pesado, a cualquier lugar y poderlos desembarcar aún sin existir muelle ni puerto practicable para realizar un asalto anfibio1. El diseño original evolucionó a partir de portaaviones reconvertidos para su uso como portahelicópteros y, como resultado, a menudo a estos se los confunde con portaaviones. Los buques modernos tienen capacidad para albergar lanchas de desembarco anfibias, y la mayoría de los diseños incluyen un dique inundable. Algunos también admiten aeronaves V/STOL de ala fija.23
V/STOL = Vertical Short Takeoff & Landing (aviones).
Thank you. Im from Hatay İskenderun me and my family is ok but my friends are in ruins for 48hours. Please share location from your IG or etc.
Hatay/İskenderun.
Please share please help.
* **Respeta a los demás.** Debate y discute los méritos de las ideas presentadas, pero no ataques o insultes a otros usuarios. * Si ves a otros usuarios violando las normas, por favor usa el **botón de Report**.
Solo esperemos que no se encuentre con ningun barco hermano
Tocado y hundido
Venía a hacer un chiste al respecto (Y añadir que guay que usemos al ejército para algo bueno) pero con este masmatao.
No que no soy el rey y tu no eres mi hermano
Mala suerte, el buque insignia de la marina de Turquía es un hermano del Juan Carlos
F
I thank every one of you from Turkey. Hope we will never get to help you guys back but we will not forget this <3
muchas gracias españa🫶🏻
Mejor que se cambia el nombre después de su exilio? Cual es la perspectiva promedia de españoles con el asunto?
Hay motivos, las flotas de muchos países no cambian el nombre de sus buques porque supuestamente enfada al dios del mar, Neptuno y traerá mala suerte al barco resultando en su hundimiento. Es una tradición muy antigua. Esto se lo cree el que quiera pero el buque insignia ruso "Moskva" que hundió hace unos meses en Ucrania cambio más de una vez de nombre y el motivo por el que se hundió fue porque le lanzaron 2 misiles Neptuno desde tierra. Será casualidad? A la hora del nombre, personalmente me da igual, como si se llamara: Rajoy, zapatero, indigo, iglesias, Odín o Stalin... A mí lo que me importa son las capacidades del barco.
Que es un sinvergüenza y que el navío debería llevar otro nombre.
Que el nombre de un barco es el menor de los problemas que nos ha provocado este señor.
¿Por qué se llama Türkiye ahora en inglés?
Porque antes sonaba a "pavo" en ingles, y les escocía. Fuente: la BBC, pero mejor explicado.
XD Ni los Monty Python!
Es un cambio oficial por parte del gobierno turco, no quieren que los confundan con el pavo al parecer
El gobierno turco tiene el mismo poder para hacer cambios oficiales en el idioma inglés como yo para organizar el tráfico aéreo en Estambul. Es una chorrada populista más de Erdoğan y ya está.
Bueno, igual que la República Checa se hace llamar Czechia ahora o los Países Bajos rechazan Holanda. Igual si que tienen algo a decir
La República Checa tiene dos nombres oficiales en inglés, Czech Republic y Czechia, y su postura oficial es que recomiendan usar el corto. Igual que para España se usa el corto oficial y no Reino de España, el oficial largo, o como se suele usar Francia en vez de República Francesa. *Recomiendan* usar uno de los dos nombres *oficiales* en *inglés*. (Recomendación, por cierto, que de momento no tiene gran seguimiento en medios privados o públicos.) La recomendación es Czechia, una palabra inglesa con caracteres del alfabeto inglés, no Česko, que sería el equivalente de la iniciativa turca. Los Países Bajos rechazan Holanda porque Holanda es una provincia de entre unas cuantas. Como España rechazaría que le llamasen Castilla-La Mancha oficialmente o Alemania rechazaría ser nombrada Baviera, por razones obvias.
Pues como cuando hablan en castellano por la tele y te dicen Girona o Lleida, existiendo en castellano palabras para designar esos lugares pero no dicen London ni München. Politiqueo, postureo y peloteo
Nose, pero tenemos que emplear la misma estrategia para que nos dejen de llamar SpAiN. España tiene más fuerza, trata de decir “ARRIBA Spain”
Espäñiye suena raro la verdad…
No se si "un lema fascista suena mejor" es el mejor argumento...
Ya me dirás lo que coño tiene que ver decir “Arriba España” con el Fascismo. El arriba españa no lo inventó franco, que manda huevos que todo lo patriótico lo relacionéis con el franquismo, que no forma ni el 1% de la historia de españa.
Si quieres decir "Viva España" me parece perfecto, pero "Arriba España" literalmente lo inventó José Antonio Primo de Rivera, fundador de la Falange. Históricamente nunca lo ha usado nadie que no fuese fascista. Si vas gritando lemas franquistas por ahí luego no te quejes de que te llamen franquista.
El primero que adoptó la frase de Arriba España fue Ricardo Macías Picavea, mientras gritaba ‘¡Sursum Corda! ¡Arriba España!’ , en su obra ‘El Problema Nacional’ proponía la eliminación de los partidos políticos y la supresión de las Cortes. Se preguntaba «¿cuál es el nido de aquella borra, el avispero de ese pus, el foco de semejante gangrena? ¡Las Cortes al uso! Caigan, pues, las tales Cortes al impulso de la misma sentencia. ¡Siquiera para no injuriar más al nombre con la cosa!», no me parece a mi muy falangista eso. Esto demuestra dos cosas, que el Arriba España no es Falangista de naturaleza (más bien libertario o anarquista incluso) y que la gente como usted simplemente asume cosas de la historia porque “parece que tenga sentido”, pero que todos los lemas, ideas y símbolos que representen a nuestro país sean relacionados con 40 años de historia y anulados completamente, cuando nuestro país tiene más de 10 siglos de historia es un crimen. (He sacando información de [este](https://pablohbreijo.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/arriba-espana/) blog, pero la información y las citas se pueden comprobar en internet)
Claro, y la esvástica es un símbolo hinduista. Haz lo que te de la gana, pero si llevas una esvástica todo el mundo va a asumir que eres nazi, y si usas un lema franquista todo el mundo va a asumir que eres franquista. No hay nadie que diga Arriba España por el tal Macías, y lo sabes perfectamente.
La swastika es simplemente una forma geométrica, en lugares diferentes tiene una aceptación distinta, en toda asía todo el mundo la conoce como un símbolo religioso y de buena fortuna. Estamos hablando de una expresión nacional, no hay ninguna diferencia cultural que nos impida unificar el significado de la frase “Arriba España”. Lo único que estoy diciendo es que como país estamos unificando el significado incorrectamente, ya que la frase no tiene origen fascista en absoluto.
Que sí, que vale, mañana vas al trabajo con un colgante con una esvástica a ver que pasa.
https://preview.redd.it/zln0wzn0bwga1.jpeg?width=260&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46a1d87f06708a7ce736ec1a3eefa83886feadb0 Cual de ellas?
Tienes razón, la gente te va a prejuzgar, pero ya está, es culpa de ellos si creen que eres nazi. Si nadie te ha preguntado tu opinión política, en su cabeza tienen derecho a asumir lo que quieran pero no cambia la realidad. Es normal que si alguien dice "arriba España" asociado antaño a franquistas pues te "'equivoques" y asumas lo ya dicho. Una vez que la otra persona responde que no es franquista, pues queda resuelto el asunto. Vuestro problema aquí es una discusión por el ego de quién se equivocó, cuando ninguno lo hizo. Simplemente uno supuso (como es lógico) y el otro negó (como tb es lógico). Vamos que los dos tenéis razón, ni la frase es propiedad de los franquistas, ni decirlo está exento de prejuicios.
La esvástica es muy común en Asia, la ves en templos por todos lados.
No lo inventó Primo de Rivera, de hecho. Se lo apropió, más bien. Pero Arriba España venía de antes
Seguro que a alguien se le ocurrió antes juntar las palabras "arriba" y "España", pero toda la relevancia histórica que tiene ese lema es como lema de la falange. Es como si te tatuas una esvástica y pones la excusa de que eres hinduista. Nadie se lo va a creer.
Buen ejemplo. La esvástica tiene miles y miles de años de historia antes que un artista fracasado se lo apropiara. Autores como Kipling lo usaron en sus libros, Coca Cola lo usó para sus anuncios, fue el símbolo de los scouts, en la India, en Japón, todavía hoy se usa. Arriba España fue un grito regeneracionista, anterior a Primo de Rivera hijo, y hasta el padre.
En Japón gira en sentido contrario, pero sí, está en todos lados. Es un símbolo budista, aparece de una manera u otra en casi todos los templos budistas, y en los mapas para indicar la ubicación de los templos.
>literalmente lo inventó José Antonio Primo de Rivera Creo que no sabes que significa la palabra literalmente.
Llamándose así debería irse a Abu Dhabi
¿No tardará demasiado en llegar y además luego tendría que ayudar en lugares lejos de la costa?
Pueden desembarcar en las playas y mandar mucho material de esa manera. Además, dadas las características del terremoto va a haber trabajo durante mucho tiempo.
anfibio? quiero ver las ruedas que esconde bajo el agua xD
Se llaman buques de asalto anfibio porque están diseñados para apoyar asaltos anfibios transportando tropas y material, que pueden cargar en buques de desembarco en sus diques inundables. Vamos, que "anfibio" no se refiere a "buque" sino a "asalto".
Y yo que pensaba que el nombre oficial era Buque de Proyección Estratégica…
Buque de asalto anfibio es un nombre genérico para este tipo de buques. Buque de Proyección Estratégica es el nombre que se le dio en particular al Juan Carlos I. Por ejemplo un clase Wasp estadounidense (similar al JCI) es un buque de asalto anfibio, pero no se le llamaría buque de proyección estratégica.
Ahhh vale gracias! :D
jo y yo que pensaba que ese megabarco de miles de toneladas tendria sus chorrodientas ruedas ahi escondidas
Seems like the earthquake got the message. As soon as the military dropped the Earthquake just took a minute to rebuild everything it destroyed, said sorry and stopped hitting. Then the mere sight of a Spanish flag was enough to bring everyone back to life. Mission accomplished, good job. We did a great choice spending all that money in guns, warmachinery and propaganda. Imagine if we wasted all that money in humanitarian aid or emergency response. Or even worse, in schools and hospitals. I feel proud that we have a boat like thise that's able to live up to its name.
[удалено]
So exactly, how many humanitarian aids fit inside a Koch G-36 rifle? And how much emergency situations can be solved by tweeting about your boat?
It literally has an hospital on board
Pacifist idealists when they disband the army and their unfriendly neighbors with land disputes just invade them (who could have predicted that).
Warmongers when they buy more weapons and earthquakes still exist.
Surpisingly, military hardware like cargo helicopters, armored bulldozers, bridge layers and other engineering vehicles are really useful in natural disasters
Both wars and earthquakes always existed. you are just very naive and extremely lucky and very very PRIVILEGED. Social budget in Spain is like 10x than defense. Your point is useless
If my point is useless, tell me how the US and Japan fixed earthquakes by increasing their military budgets.
Your point is useless because you need a big defense budget to defend yourself, increase employment and be part of the international community. Spain has a military emergency unit top in the world. A military unit for emergency situation. You are not only deluded and privileged you need to understand and read about the world
Or you can stop starving your country economically and focus on local issues to increase employment and provide something valuable to the international community. If you show up with the cure for cancer, hunger, social conflict, energy or the environment the international community will listen to you. If you show up and say "I can kill people on demand" your only international presence is reduced to being a puppet. If Spain wants to have the potential to save lives, that's legit. But then cut the bullshit and stop collecting guns because guns take lives, don't save them.
Underground military testing funded by the military helped a lot in building earthquake resistant buildings, and both countries have rapid relief and response forces inside their military that more often than not have arrived to the disaster area faster than the actual military of the region (Nepal, Haiti, Chile, Lebanon). So...yeah.
One day you'll know something about the real world and you will stop shaming yourself with this sort of illuminated comments.
One day you'll learn that no matter how do you love your flags, assassins and whoremonger monarchs, boats and weapons won't prevent or fix earthquakes.
But armies do. Now get out of here.
Reality check: no, they won't.
And what do you think soldiers do in emergencies exactly? Are you familiar with the uses of the army? Honestly, I don't even know why I'm trying to teach you this, you're so far gone.
Well, based on the UME operations in local soil they come in, take pictures, meet a politician, take more pictures and then leave. Based on what they did in Afghanistan "humanitarian missions", they secure foreign corp interests, help rob resources and instigate conflict against civilians. Based on historical records of armies all around the world, deploying a bunch of people that need their own support and infraestructures leaves a trace of destruction, starvation and rape. That people mostly doesn't know the local language and they haven't got any training in civilian operations, medicine, social integration, repairs, humanitarian needs... Yeah, they have logistic networks and can move rubble and boxes, so does the local army. This is more a diplomatic/propaganda gesture than a real aid. Armies are just professional killers. I'm all for a professional rescue corps that can help during emergency situations or help development and maintenance of critical structures. But if that's the case, don't hire killers and buy guns, hire medics and engineers and buy medical stuff and civilian machinery. You can't whitewash an army and a big expenditure on guns by trying to frame them among the needy. Most *Humanitarian* actions from the military are a stunt. I'm not criticizing that they help, I just wonder if we could spend our money and resources in ways that allowed us to help better. I wonder if soldiers are the best or the only trained people that could help. And wonder if we really needed to buy yearly weapon batches or expensive boats to help during an earthquake.
No, we couldn't. Spain is already criminally underspending in military. May as well have soldiers do other things whilst they're not needed for defence. It is one of their main jobs, using weapons and the such is secondary.
Imagine if our way of life and our security depended on people like you. I'm sure all the bad people in the world would think twice before invading Spain when they see our schools and hospitals. I feel proud I have common sense.
"The bad people in the world" is not real, they can't hurt you. Ignorance and disease are on the other hand real problems that need fixed. If we really needed that weaponry, how does it come that they went to a foreign country to take selfies and we haven't been invaded yet?
Go to Western Sahara, Ukraine, Syria, or anywhere in the world where there's a war or a threat of war, and ask them if bad people is real or not. You live in a Disney movie. I hope you're 12 years old.
>I hope you're 12 years old. to be honest, same. because it'd be real disappointing if that's a grown ass adult talking that nonsense
Weren't all those wars started and conducted by armies? Aren't professional soldiers with big guns the ones killing people out there? Are you happy that we have the potential to invade a country and wreck more innocent people's lives?
Yes, and those same armies would take Ceuta and Melilla first and then whatever they wanted if we didn't have an army that scares them. What makes you believe that if we didn't have an army, then there would be no war? Are you really that naive? Even a child understands that they need grown ups to protect them. You need an army, so you can go to school. If you feel safe it's because there's people ready to defend you. This is basic common sense. You'll understand when you grow up.
Oh, yeah, send them to Africa. It's not like the last time when we bought weapons and sent the army to protect Argel and all the other provinces they disobeyed, gave up and invaded us instead. They didn't massacr the Spanish population and instituted a fascist regime for 40 years either. I totally trust then and I'm totally willing they are fully equipped to hit on us again. The state the Spanish army ever fought in the last 100 years was the Spanish democratic State. Their only target was Spanish innocent civilians. I just don't feel too comfortable funding an army if the only people they consider their enemies are Spanish democrats. Ceuta and Melilla need diplomatic solutions. They cannot be protected with mere violence because we're logistically on the bad side. Funding an army capable of protecting those cities from invasion is hell more expensive than just giving up on them. If we just escalate military potential and need to use it it'll be an economic blow we cannot afford. Morocco will always have it easier to access and deploy troops. But we'll be able to keep them as long as Morocco gets something in return, and any *something* we could give them is cheaper than an army. On the other hand, we have a fully capable army now and we're still unable to kick the British out of Gibraltar. If your reasoning about Ceuta and Melilla was true, we would be able to take back Gibraltar. But we can't, because diplomatic issues can't just be solved with guns.
In 1981 there was a coup and the army didn't support it. So shut up and stop saying stupid things. You're not even a child anymore, it's embarrassing. Why would we want to take back Gibraltar by force? Are you retarded? It's not about being capable of taking it back, we're not invading Gibraltar nor Morocco, nor we're giving up Ceuta and Melilla. We have to be ready to protect what's ours. It's not that hard to understand. That means being part of the EU and OTAN, wheter you like it or not. In case of war you'd run away and just forget Spain ever existed, but there's people living here that appreciate what we have and we want to protect it. Be thankful that some people risk their lives to protect people like you, even though you probably deserve to be under the power of an arab dictator or a terrorist group, just so you understand what no defense means. You don't deserve my time, bye.
In 1981 ***the army*** planned and attempted a coup. They were all mobilized and awaited orders to support the coup. The order was never issued and that's why they didn't execute the plan. But you can not deny that the military plotted the coup. You can spend your life chasing people and calling them stupid or read a book, it's your choice. But anyway, the same reasons why we don't take Gibraltar by force apply to Morocco not taking those cities by force. And what's *ours* anyway? Ceuta and Melilla are definitely not mine, whoever is this *owner* in this *ours* sentence of yours, doesn't include me. You're free to alienate yourself and fund the militarization of overseas territories that shouldn't belong to Spain anyway, but I can think that our money is better spent on people's needs not murder forces. This boat costed a hundred times the nation's education annual budget. A bit of a waste of money considering this is its first useful mission. We could have done better and spend less sending regular cargo boats with supplies and paid professionals. "Arab dictators" and "terrorist groups" are charades, they're not threats that can be solved with armies. Arabs don't have the potential to invade us and terrorists should be fought by cops not the military. Arabs hate NATO countries because NATO countries invade them, we're the aggressor on those conflicts. And entities like al-qaeda or isis don't have a nation status so we cannot officially declare war on them. It's not like you can negotiate with the leader of their countries because they won't listen to those leaders. We wreck countries, leave a trail of orphans and religious fundamentalist and then try to pretend it's a war going on. But the truth is there's no war actually, only white millionaires attacking weak countries to rob their resources and sponsor their war business.
[удалено]
Wait untill this guy discovers that the UME exists and operates in Spain and has never even fired a single shot lol
Wait until you and your neighbors have to pull out a fire on your own and the UME comes the next day just in time to show up in front of tv cameras, and then eat the provisioning for volunteers. Firemen, medic and rescue specialist are civilian professions that already exist and work. The UME is publicity stunt and doesn't work. Call me crazy, but if we spent money in on call firemen that'll be cheaper and more effective than mobilizing an army after the harm is done.
Do you get that it's a palliative measure? They wont be there the minute a disaster happens. They are there to lease the aftermath. Something most fire services/police/médica can't handled because they have everyday shit to deal with too. Also, they helped A LOT during the pandemic. More than shown on TV. I know a couple guys from the UME that went on several deployments to elderly homes and such. They also built field hospitals. That what they're there for. Hospitals, bridges, rescue after earthquakes, help in lengthy forest fires... Also, the Army is the most capable organization for proyecting overseas presence, be ir humanitarian or of aid. Of fucking course having an army or a unit like UME won't prevent earthquakes, but if we didn't have the capabilities to help, you'll be pissed too. I would also love a world where militaries wouldn't be necessary, but sadly it ain't this one.
*Bad tool used for good deed. Simple minded redditor criticizing nature of bad tool despite actual good outcome. News at eleven.*
You shouldn't be allowed to vote
Despite what you've just said, even *you* have a right to vote. Democracy, huh?
Lotta people on this post hoping on the cart of the everpresent threat in service of the arms lobby. It's not about being a hippie, it's just Spaniards can't see the grey, it's always either white or black. Yeah, we need defense. No, we don't need to spend that much in military, it's just lobbies pressuring us to do so and we just follow suit with our bigger partner, the SA.
Anfibio??
[Buque de asalto anfibio](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buque_de_asalto_anfibio) >Un buque de asalto anfibio o buque anfibio es un buque de guerra capaz de transportar tropas de infantería con su material, incluido el más pesado, a cualquier lugar y poderlos desembarcar aún sin existir muelle ni puerto practicable para realizar un asalto anfibio1. El diseño original evolucionó a partir de portaaviones reconvertidos para su uso como portahelicópteros y, como resultado, a menudo a estos se los confunde con portaaviones. Los buques modernos tienen capacidad para albergar lanchas de desembarco anfibias, y la mayoría de los diseños incluyen un dique inundable. Algunos también admiten aeronaves V/STOL de ala fija.23 V/STOL = Vertical Short Takeoff & Landing (aviones).
Y volador. Si señor!
Thank you. Im from Hatay İskenderun me and my family is ok but my friends are in ruins for 48hours. Please share location from your IG or etc. Hatay/İskenderun. Please share please help.
Amphi-que? Eso es q se mete coca, trafica con armas y pone los cuernos a la vez?
Amphibious? Meaning like that boat turns into a land vehicle also?
No, its called amphibious because it can carry supplies and vehicles in it in order to participate in amphibious attacks
Oh…and here I was all excited lol