• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

China warplanes tail U.S. and Japan fighter jets; How Far Will China Go?

We went over this in a different thread. This is part and parcel of your tendency toward denigrating your own country because of your anti-Obama fervor.

I WILL say this -- the ONLY source from which our dominance of the oceans faces serious threat in the foreseeable future is internal.

My Point though, is that China isn't looking for worldwide dominance, just over the East and South China Seas. The requirements for that are significantly less then what would be needed for a country to project it's power across the globe.
 
While this may simply be posturing, it still is very dangerous to have war planes in such proximity to each other. My question: How likely is this to cause a conflict in the East China Sea? How serious should we take China's procolomation of "unspecified defensive measures against those that don't comply."

Reminds me of The Bedford Incident.

In any case, things are heating up.
 
God I hope some **** comes of this. Maybe then we'll get serious about boycotting Chinese made crap.
 
Heya Beaudreaux :2wave: What resources are on these Islands?

f4dd3f56b7a51827440f6a7067004008_original.jpg


20ce70edf5084627440f6a7067007693.jpg

Its not necessarily the islands that contain resources, but the ocean and seabed which would effectively be ceded to China. In a similar way to the Falklands in the 80's and the current oil and gas exploration in progress in its related territorial waters...
 
Heya Beaudreaux :2wave: What resources are on these Islands?

f4dd3f56b7a51827440f6a7067004008_original.jpg


20ce70edf5084627440f6a7067007693.jpg

On the islands? Weeds.

Under the islands and the surrounding sea? Oil.

Plus, this extension by China would also move their ADIZ out to a point that is would make it more difficult for the US to come to the aid of Taiwan if China decided to get stupid. This ADIZ cuts the routes from Korea and Japan to Taiwan.
 
It is Japan's Airspace. China publishing a map that says "oh, this is ours now" does not actually make it theirs.



If this is a plan, then my bet would be it looks like this:

Raise tensions to the point where Japan finally shoots down a Chinese UAV. Declare that to be an Act of War, and take some posturing moves. Then declare that you're willing to start talks over the issue, thereby placing Japan in a no-win situation. Either they can refuse, in which case China appears to be de-escalating and Japan looks like the aggressor (which is easy for her to do in that region of the world) thus degrading her ability to form closer defense relationships with the Philippines, Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia, et. al., or Japan has to admit the disputed nature of the Senkakus (which - I would bet - would be what China is after).​

But I think it is very possible that you are correct that they simply did not anticipate a Combined US-JPN-ROK reaction like they've seen. I wonder if they read too much into our failure to defend red lines in Syria and focus on Iranian negotiations. :shrug:



Well, outside of the above scenario, yeah, they are in some trouble. The question that I wonder who is asking is what the leaderships self-perceived ability to back down is. If they are - as a growing number thing - in for some serious fiscal pain with their economic readjustment, then it may be that they can't afford to look weak on Restoring the Grand Tradition as well.

I think the most likely answer is that they overplayed their hand. One of the hallmarks of Chinese foreign policy for the past decade has been colossal incompetence when it comes to assessing the reactions of foreign powers. In the space of a few years China has virtually shed all of the credibility it had stockpiled as a trustworthy and/or peaceable power by aggressively engaging in these regional territorial disputes. These inexplicable decisions have hurled South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Singapore, etc more firmly towards the US camp and along an anti-China access than anything else. I think that once again they didn't anticipate this reaction and I think they are unbelievably blind to how they are perceived by regional and international actors.
 
The Chinese carrier is at sea and are conducting air operations training. The Chinese have already laid the keel for a second carrier. China plans on having four carriers and maybe more.

The threat isn't today but twenty or thirty years in the future. Most in the worlds naval community believe that China will challenge the U.S. Navy in the South China Sea in twenty or so years.

This is why most in the U.S. military community and our Allies in the Pacific criticize Obama for only paying attention to the present and not looking at what threats there are over the horizon.

While the current U.S. Navy under the Obama administration struggles just keeping two carriers at sea, our Navy has become a hollow force and can't even project it's power as it was able to do five years ago. Look at what just happened in the Mediterranean during the Syrian show down some months ago. We were only able to deploy three additional destroyers to the 6th Fleet AOR. When the Chief of Naval Operations was asked "whear are our carriers" ? "Why is our surge carrier still sitting in Norfolk" ? His answerer was the carrier's crew weren't properly trained to put to sea. Instead of training to go to war they are attending mandatory classroom sensitivity training.

While our Navy is shrinking our allies took notice and our building up their navies.

Great Britian are building two large super carriers and new escorts. Japan just launched it's first aircraft carrier since WW ll. India's is buying Russia's old carriers while the Russian Bear has come out of hibernation and will be building three new fleets with all new high tech warships. And more often than not, the Russians get it right with new ship designs.

There's a world wide navy build up going on as war clouds are forming over the Western Pacific. And our current administration is to incompetent to see it.

During the Syrian show down in the Med, do you know why the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group was hold up in the Red Sea and didn't transit the Suez Canal and enter the 6th Fleet AOR ?

Because Putin moved one of his Slava class cruisers into the Mediterranean Sea. A Slava class cruiser was designed for one mission, to sink a Nimitz class carrier and it's escorts from 300 miles away with mach-5 supersonic anti ship missiles, each with a 2,000 explosive warhead. And a Slava class cruiser doesn't work alone, it has a few attack subs designed to sink NATO ships and hunt down American subs. It also has AA destroyers who main purpose is protecting the cruiser by shooting down NATO aircraft and ASW destroyers designed to destroy American subs.

View attachment 67157458

It is extremely difficult to pin the blame for our anemic Navy on the Obama Administration when so much of the problem is rooted in an incredibly long and expensive project appropriations and development process. When it turned out that LCS and Zumwalt were duds we'd already spend decades and billions to develop them. We're only now making the decision to go back to the Burkes, and this is a decision that will have ramifications for the next twenty years and all the intervening Presidencies. That is just one small part of the problem. At the end of the day we have an increasingly aging fleet, severe problems with maintenance, problems with keeping experienced personal on our ships, problems with funding full systems readiness, etc. These are structural problems that have been brewing on a long timeline. Short of a major infusion of cash and a massive overhaul they are problems we are going to band aid over till we come out the other side.
 
Honestly, it's not the aircraft carrier that we should be worried about. It's more of a statement piece at this point. The real threat comes from their ASBM (or Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles.) If they wanted to, they could lock down the East China Sea within moments by preventing any ship from entering the area. The strategy, coined Anti-Access/Area Denial (or A2/AD is a fancy term for layered defense across multiple areas such as land, sea, air. A2/AD seeks to wedge an asymmetrical dagger in the heart of America's seemingly insurmountable military edge. Weapons such as ultra-quiet diesel submarines, advanced mines, anti-ship weapons, and even cyber or anti-satellite weapons would seek to engage U.S. forces an in an effort to slow, stop or deter enemy combatants from entering a, let's say, air defense zone.

America's Anti-Access Nightmare Coming True

Anti-ship ballistic missiles are not realistic weapons, and the DF-21 especially is not worth being concerned about.

Firstly there is a very good reason no nuclear state uses ballistic missiles as tactical weapons aside from rocket artillery. Why? Because there is no immediately knowing if the missile signature detected carries a nuclear payload. It has been a recurring problem the United States has faced when trying to develop its Prompt Global Strike Program. The only realistic way to accomplish the goals of the program at present is an enhanced ICBM capability. But we cant really do that. Because there is no way for other powers to be certain that the missile in question is conventional and not a sinister nuclear strike. Likewise there is no way to be sure that the MRBM heading towards one of our carrier battle groups is armed with a conventional or nuclear payload.

Secondly its just technically really difficult to do and China has a poor track record. You have to identify the ship you want to hit, make sure it is the one you think it is, spin up your missile, make sure your targeting information is accurate (satellite intelligence more than a few minutes out of date wont help), and then fire a ballistic missile at a moving target on the ocean and not only hope it hits but hope it isn't intercepted.

China is big on rolling out wunderwaffe and big prestige weapons projects. They are bad at serial producing modern military technology. What is most concerning about the Chinese military buildup isn't their token aircraft carrier (which by the way is going to get sunk the first night of the war) it is the massive growth of their littoral air arm, missile boats & submarines, and ASCM capabilities. The real risk we face from China is being swamped by a flood of aircraft and smaller vessels that try and attrit Allied forces in their littoral zones and gain control over the area. I think they are actually relatively close to that being a plausible objective. The best countermeasure is to station more ships and aircraft in encircling countries.
 
The only thing old on that carrier is the ships hull. The carrier was completely gutted and rebuilt from the keel up with a new propulsion and power generating system, electronics. advanced radars, communications and weapons systems. There's little that is old on that carrier.

What the worlds naval community are asking, how will the Chinese use their carrier ? Sea lane control, air strike, surface warfare or as an ASW carrier ? Nobody knows yet.

i wouldnt be too worried about such a chinese carrier,its built off a russian carrier,and russia to date has never had a successfull aircraft carrier,they could build missle and tanks and advanced jets,but asking them to buuild a functioning aircraft carrier,and the russian engineers cringe.


now you have the chinese with no experience in that area modifying a ship built by a country that couldnt get them to work right,its a recipe for failure.not to mention if youve ever seen chinas navy plan,it is to turn cargo ships into battleships,and send soldiers in cargo ships sleeping in connexes.seeing how underpowered their navy is,its no surprise they want to play catchup so bad.

or in old world war logic,those who control the sea control the war,china has no control over any sea should it be at war,hence it will fail fur to poor logistics.
 
Its not necessarily the islands that contain resources, but the ocean and seabed which would effectively be ceded to China. In a similar way to the Falklands in the 80's and the current oil and gas exploration in progress in its related territorial waters...

Mornin HD. :2wave: Thanks.....I should have been a bit more clear. As I was considering the Oil. I didn't know if they had any other resources on any of the isles.
 
On the islands? Weeds.

Under the islands and the surrounding sea? Oil.

Plus, this extension by China would also move their ADIZ out to a point that is would make it more difficult for the US to come to the aid of Taiwan if China decided to get stupid. This ADIZ cuts the routes from Korea and Japan to Taiwan.


Mornin' Beaudreaux. :2wave: Weeds.....<perk> .....
weedsmoking.gif
koff koff, I mean just shocking. :shock:.....:lol:
 
What goes on in that part of the world (or ANY part of the world outside of United States territory) is none of the American government's direct business.

Let Japan/Taiwan/China fight over those uninhabited rocks.
 
God I hope some **** comes of this. Maybe then we'll get serious about boycotting Chinese made crap.

you would risk a potential war with a super power just so you can get people to boycott Chinese products? lol wtf
 
What goes on in that part of the world (or ANY part of the world outside of United States territory) is none of the American government's direct business.

Let Japan/Taiwan/China fight over those uninhabited rocks.


yepp.gif




:2razz:
 
you would risk a potential war with a super power just so you can get people to boycott Chinese products? lol wtf

Yes and no.

What I really want is for people to see the Chinese government for exactly what it is.
 
which is what?

Someone we should not be such close trading partners with. Our government and our citizens treat Chinese businesses better than we treat our own, we let them sit at our table, we treat them as a civilized guest in our world market. Why do we have embargoes against Cuba, but not China? These people are not our friends, they never were, and barring major upheavals in their socio political environment, they never will be. The world needs to see who this person we are selling our souls to really is.
 
The Chinese can't sell us anything by shooting down a military plane. No, they're just posturing and making themselves feel important. In the meantime, why are we flying military planes in their airspace? Same reason, maybe?

Because it isn't their airspace. It's international airspace that they have proclaimed to be theirs.
 
The Chinese can't sell us anything by shooting down a military plane. No, they're just posturing and making themselves feel important. In the meantime, why are we flying military planes in their airspace? Same reason, maybe?

It's not their airspace, they just decided suddenly to MAKE it theirs.
 
you would risk a potential war with a super power just so you can get people to boycott Chinese products? lol wtf

You keep saying this -- "YOU would risk a potential war." You will not give the slightest quarter to the idea that it's CHINA who's risking a potential war -- or even that they have any culpability at all along those lines. You think China is the good guy here, and that we, by continuing to use the air routes we've used for almost 70 years, are the aggressor.

It's CHINA who's risking the war with us, THE superpower. But no; to you, that's a wise move.
 
The purpose of this between China and the USA is called "propaganda" and "PR marketing."

Nothing could be more profitable to the military industrial complex and military of both countries than an arms race between us. It would be worth TRILLIONS of dollars. The USA only spends 29% of it's federal budget on the military - about 40% if military veteran entitlements are added.

OMG! Less than half of the federal budget goes to the military? How outrageous! It should be at least half. Since no war between China and the USA will or can happen, it would become a multi-trillion dollar who-has-a-bigger-penis contest with no military value, but it would make a lot of people much richer than they already are.

"Beware of the military industrial complex." Eisenhower
 
The purpose of this between China and the USA is called "propaganda" and "PR marketing."

Nothing could be more profitable to the military industrial complex and military of both countries than an arms race between us. It would be worth TRILLIONS of dollars. The USA only spends 29% of it's federal budget on the military - about 40% if military veteran entitlements are added.

OMG! Less than half of the federal budget goes to the military? How outrageous! It should be at least half. Since no war between China and the USA will or can happen, it would become a multi-trillion dollar who-has-a-bigger-penis contest with no military value, but it would make a lot of people much richer than they already are.

"Beware of the military industrial complex." Eisenhower



Well Japan isn't having any of this......its about Culture and people. Legends. Where do ya think Godzilla comes from.
spin.gif
..... :lol:

th
 
The Chinese can't sell us anything by shooting down a military plane. No, they're just posturing and making themselves feel important.
In the meantime, why are we flying military planes in their airspace?
Same reason, maybe?




My guess is to show the Chinese that they can't tell the USA what to do.

It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out.
 
Back
Top Bottom