• 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!

Is China battle ready?

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Generally, the purpose in Naval VSTOL aircraft is to provide close air support to Marine forces, and providing a CAP over their amphibious transport ships." Of #774
My comment to which your comment ostensibly responds was about aircraft design & capability.

Your reply addresses mission / purpose.

They're two completely different things.
 
Vice Admiral Yoji Koda (retired) who is the former commander in chief of the Japan Self-Defense Fleet wrote in the Review of the U.S. Naval War College (of which his is a graduate) that the Japanese helicopter destroyers (of submarines) are in fact "multipurpose ships" rather than "strike-oriented carriers" per se....


"It is important to remember that a characteristic of maritime operations is flexibility. The JMSDF, like many other navies, can organize any type of force for any given mission by combining ships of the most appropriate types. A JMSDF force composed of some optimal combination of ships could complete almost any possible mission in any waters on the planet. In Hyuga and its sisters the JMSDF has a world-class capability.

"The flood of construction of carrier-like multipurpose ships, like JS Hyuga, in the world’s navies may cause concern about a new “carrier arms race.” However, as we have seen, each navy must formulate, like the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, its own strategy and force-planning rationale for this type of ship, taking account of contemporary security circumstances and the tendency toward expanded naval missions. Through-deck multirole ships — not the strike-oriented carriers of several navies — are the most suitable for deepening international coordination and collaboration among navies.


(emphasis added)

https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment...-Carrier-Race--Strategy,-Force-Planning,-and-


Japan has now completed the repositioning of the bulk of its armed forces from the north where they defended against Russia to the south to defend against China. The relocation of the mass of the Japan Self-Defense Forces began in 2012 shortly after Shinzo Abe was elected prime minister.
 
Last edited:
and America can with it's £20 trillion debt and it's reliance on the dollar remaining reserve currency


CCP Dynasty need USD because it is the global currency of forex reserves. CCP are undergoing a forex "reserve reversal."

Meaning CCP torched $1 Trillion of their forex reserves last year insufficiently defending their paper money currency which is being devalued by global markets. Included in the $1 Trillion was $500 billion of U.S. Treasuries. CCP Boyz need USD and they need 'em desperately.

It is awesomely significant global markets are depreciating the CNY, not the Boyz of Beijing. The Boyz have in fact lost control of their currency. It's as if the IMF put me in charge of the CCP currency and economy. Yet the ironic fact remains it's the CCP Boyz who are running their own economy into the ground and shredding their paper currency.

Over the past 18 months CCP forex reserves have shrunk from $3.9 Trillion to the present $2.8 Trillion and counting. Coming soon is $2.0 Trillion which is the technical point of no return.

The ratio of debt to GDP is 250% as the rate of debt creation continues to increase faster than the meager GDP growth. Keep in mind the Boyz's GDP data are "man-made" so the whole thing is worse than it appears. Anti-Americans are soon going to have to find a new champion cause this one is going under. Same as all the rest of 'em that came before CCP went kaput.
 
Last edited:
You do not need to reinforce anything. They can (and have) already landed V-22s on them, and were designed to handle any of the VSTOL jets in the US inventory (Harrier, F-35B).

Beg to differ. Even the article Tanmgo provided discusses the mods needed to really prep the carrier for regular use of F-35B type aircraft. Temporary/Emergency use should not need any mods.

Personally, I doubt that Japan will buy any F-35Bs, no more than they will buy Harriers. There is still a lot of baggage there when it comes to WWII, and I do not want they want to bring up the memories at home and in other nations by having "true aircraft carriers" again.

But can these handle VSTOL fighters? Without a doubt, as they sit right this minute. The biggest possible problem might be the logistical support they can provide. Since it is a helicopter ship designed for ASW, I am not sure how big the magazines on board are, and how much ordinance they can carry. Ultimately I suspect that may be the biggest problem in their operating as more then a pit stop for VSTOL aircraft.

That is why I stated limited V/STOL capabilities.

Even with the Belleau Wood (LHA-3) saw few vertical launches with the Harriers on board. Usually it was a roll and go launch and a "two bounces then roll" landing. (I know, my bunk was about 36 inches from the deck).
 
Beg to differ. Even the article Tanmgo provided discusses the mods needed to really prep the carrier for regular use of F-35B type aircraft. Temporary/Emergency use should not need any mods.



That is why I stated limited V/STOL capabilities.

Even with the Belleau Wood (LHA-3) saw few vertical launches with the Harriers on board. Usually it was a roll and go launch and a "two bounces then roll" landing. (I know, my bunk was about 36 inches from the deck).


So what of tactical or strategic consequence and application do you say to the four-star Chief of Naval Operations when he visits your ship to ask you individually for your input.

Beyond of course relocating your bunk closer to the coffee deck.

If you'd rather not have to deal with the CNO, then what perhaps might you say to the retired Japanese admiral I quoted above.

Or perhaps you'd just rather not say anything to anyone about it...the strong silent type. Man of few words.
 
T #755

Excellent.

I don't try to keep up with it, don't read the trade journals, etc.

But I like aviation, and have a completely groundless affection for the F-16.

And yes. Ironic that the B-52's in our inventory tend to be older than the pilots that fly them.

I just tried to post a pic of a Sukhoi I thought you might enjoy.

But the image was rejected for being too large (though I think it's smaller than #2001 in post #755).



Anyone who might like the USAF Flying Falcon F-16 Viper will almost surely get off on this video about it. The most versatile fighter.


Said an F-16 pilot: "F-16 is the best place to be when you're being fired at."


F-16 is shown doing the hitherto impossible of flying above anti-aircraft missile defenses to then swoop down to cut under the missiles to blast the bases.

Iraq and Kosovo.
 
So what of tactical or strategic consequence and application do you say to the four-star Chief of Naval Operations when he visits your ship to ask you individually for your input.

Beyond of course relocating your bunk closer to the coffee deck.

If you'd rather not have to deal with the CNO, then what perhaps might you say to the retired Japanese admiral I quoted above.

Or perhaps you'd just rather not say anything to anyone about it...the strong silent type. Man of few words.

You are much better served regurgitating things you do not understand than you are trying to discuss that which you do not understand.

And what is a "coffee deck"? Somewhere imaginary Lieutenants go to sleep it off?
 
You are much better served regurgitating things you do not understand than you are trying to discuss that which you do not understand.

And what is a "coffee deck"? Somewhere imaginary Lieutenants go to sleep it off?


Manner of speaking of course, not literal. But you knew that ne c'est pas.

One could say there's nothing to see in the posts. However, anecdotal stuff has its value so speaking for myself I look forward to more of the 'being there' documentary presentations and accounts. Where the bunk wuz and the official nco coffee mess, er, dining room wuz too. (Make a movie of being there if someone hadn't though of it already and done it some time ago.)

I'd bet btw the Japanese win their next war.

USAF and USN will certainly win America's next war. Ground wars are shall we say passe'. Even Beijing knows this much. In fact Beijing knew it before the Pentagon knew it. In fact the mantra in Beijing for thousands of years continues to be don't fight don't win.

Just sayin.
 
Manner of speaking of course, not literal. But you knew that ne c'est pas.

One could say there's nothing to see in the posts. However, anecdotal stuff has its value so speaking for myself I look forward to more of the 'being there' documentary presentations and accounts. Where the bunk wuz and the official nco coffee mess, er, dining room wuz too. (Make a movie of being there if someone hadn't though of it already and done it some time ago.)

I'd bet btw the Japanese win their next war.

USAF and USN will certainly win America's next war. Ground wars are shall we say passe'. Even Beijing knows this much. In fact Beijing knew it before the Pentagon knew it. In fact the mantra in Beijing for thousands of years continues to be don't fight don't win.

Just sayin.

Ground wars are passe?

No.

Just no.

Any fresh butter bar could tell you that, much less the JCS.
 
Even with the Belleau Wood (LHA-3) saw few vertical launches with the Harriers on board. Usually it was a roll and go launch and a "two bounces then roll" landing. (I know, my bunk was about 36 inches from the deck).

I never served on the Tarawa class, but I remember my time on the USS Iwo Jima all to well. God we all hated that thing, being packed in like sardines.
 
I never served on the Tarawa class, but I remember my time on the USS Iwo Jima all to well. God we all hated that thing, being packed in like sardines.

Well, I had a reprieve of sorts. One was being a Gunnery Sergent - Chiefs Mess was well kitted out. And two, I owned the Air Armory as the senior enlisted for the air element. But God how the ship rolled in a storm.
 
Well, I had a reprieve of sorts. One was being a Gunnery Sergent - Chiefs Mess was well kitted out. And two, I owned the Air Armory as the senior enlisted for the air element. But God how the ship rolled in a storm.

I was an 0311 Supercargo. Shoved down in the quad stacked stretchers tied onto poles they called "beds".
 
I was an 0311 Supercargo. Shoved down in the quad stacked stretchers tied onto poles they called "beds".


I know what you mean about the berthing.

But on the other hand, in a pinch, stretchers work.

I had to go across the Pacific in a C-130 once. They had stretchers just aft of the cockpit bulkhead. After lift off I would hop up, strap in, put on my fight deck helmet and snooze through the flight. I learned early to force myself to sleep on and semi horizontal surface.
 
Some of youse guyz had it tough, no doubt. Americans who wear the uniform adapt well however as youse do attest. :peace

We in The Old Guard of the Army (3rd Infantry Regiment) at Ft. Meyer next to the Pentagon and Arlington National Cemetery had our own moments.

Here's a classic one that is in fact the standard one. It's your basic Old Guard stuff you do without thinking about it. U.S. Army Band performs the Old Guard March, "The American Soldier."


The kid is the guy at the colonel's right...my place if not actually moi at the time of the video. Twenty five years before yes.

Ft. Meyer is a cool duty station of U.S. Army. Pleasant place. Lotsa generals live there, to include Army Chief of Staff (Quarters #1) and chairman of JCS (Quarters #6). And at one time the kid himself :2usflag:

After the Color Guard comes Honor Guard Company of The Old Guard, the elite of the elite. (The video has half of the whole of The Old Guard six companies.) For anyone who might appreciate it, marching on grass is half the fun of it.


Yet while the Army marches Marines strut...

From USMC Barracks 8th and I Streets Washington DC

USMC Parade at Iwo Jima Memorial located outside South Gate of Ft. Myer Arlington VA adjacent to Arlington National Cemetery next to Pentagon.


This stuff is like anything else military. Once you learn it you just do it. Can't get caught up thinking of every eighth of an inch or keeping your cover, or the sweat dripping off your nose. Or of the military honors funeral you just in in ANC.
 
Last edited:
Ground wars are passe?

No.

Just no.

Any fresh butter bar could tell you that, much less the JCS.


Say what the following wars have in common, okay Gunny...

Korean Conflict
Vietnam War
Afghanistan
Iraq


Four land wars in Asia Gunny.

Four of 'em. Land wars in Asia. Not just one and not just the same mistake twice. Four of 'em. Four ****ups, four times.

And we're still in Afghanistan -- of a necessity perhaps but still it's the last place we want our guys to be. Still screwing around in Iraq, Syria also.

ISIL needs to be dealt with so that's of a necessity too. Assad and Putin yes, got to do it there too. On a small scale.

So Gunny next time we do a Desert Storm you let us know. Cause the only thing that can happen to any such large scale military operation, from Korea (1950-53) and Vietnam to the ME are Viet Cong waiting for you to order a cold one at a sidewalk cafe, or IE roadside bombs everywhere you go, another wedding party getting blasted, and some idiot SecDef doing his asshole shock and awe show while ordinary people pray in cellars or in their living rooms.

Next time we do a major ground operation involving large unit maneuver forces such as divisions you be sure to let us know, okay Gunny. Rather, as current policy we'll be moving nothing on land that's bigger than a brigade size force...as a policy. One-third the size of a division (typically).

It's comforting to know btw the people from top to bottom who brought us the past 50 years of major military operations are either fully discredited or blessedly retired. Cause a new leaf has been turned over at long last. No more large unit maneuver ground forces as in the past half-century post WW II.
 
Say what the following wars have in common, okay Gunny...

Korean Conflict
Vietnam War
Afghanistan
Iraq


Four land wars in Asia Gunny.

Four of 'em. Land wars in Asia. Not just one and not just the same mistake twice. Four of 'em. Four ****ups, four times.

And we're still in Afghanistan -- of a necessity perhaps but still it's the last place we want our guys to be. Still screwing around in Iraq, Syria also.

ISIL needs to be dealt with so that's of a necessity too. Assad and Putin yes, got to do it there too. On a small scale.

So Gunny next time we do a Desert Storm you let us know. Cause the only thing that can happen to any such large scale military operation, from Korea (1950-53) and Vietnam to the ME are Viet Cong waiting for you to order a cold one at a sidewalk cafe, or IE roadside bombs everywhere you go, another wedding party getting blasted, and some idiot SecDef doing his asshole shock and awe show while ordinary people pray in cellars or in their living rooms.

Next time we do a major ground operation involving large unit maneuver forces such as divisions you be sure to let us know, okay Gunny. Rather, as current policy we'll be moving nothing on land that's bigger than a brigade size force...as a policy. One-third the size of a division (typically).

It's comforting to know btw the people from top to bottom who brought us the past 50 years of major military operations are either fully discredited or blessedly retired. Cause a new leaf has been turned over at long last. No more large unit maneuver ground forces as in the past half-century post WW II.

Prattle and ignorance.
 
So Gunny next time we do a Desert Storm you let us know. Cause the only thing that can happen to any such large scale military operation, from Korea (1950-53) and Vietnam to the ME are Viet Cong

A lot of this has to do with objective.

What is the objective in the conflict itself?

Well, in pretty much all of the conflicts you listed, the objective was met. The Taliban are no longer in control of Afghanistan. Iraq no longer controls Kuwait. The Ba'ath Party is no longer in control of Iraq. So tell me, where did the military loose?

Anything beyond the achievement of the mission is not military, it is politics. And that is a completely different subject all together.

And BTW, I even include Vietnam in that.

In 1973, the Paris Peace Accords were signed. Part of that agreement was that the US would leave South Vietnam, and that North Vietnam would never again attack their Southern neighbor.

In other words, war won.

The fact that the North was dishonest and attacked anyways was political, and the fact that the US failed to respond to their ally as promised criminal. But the war was in fact won, it was the politicians that blew it.

You do not seem to be able to differentiate the difference between military goals and objectives, and political ones. Do not confuse the two, they are very different.

Like in WWII, what were the objectives? To defeat the Axis powers, or to completely destroy their governments and replace them with democracies?

Because guess what? In 1 of the 3, we failed. Japan is still a Monarchy, in fact it is the oldest Monarchy on the planet. But the military goal was met, their military power was largely destroyed and they capitulated. The rest is simply politics.

Myself, I think the most boneheaded thing we did was to insist that both nations become Democracies. Democracies are by nature the most unstable governments there are. Placing an unstable government in charge of an unstable region is a recipe for disaster.

I have been saying for over 15 years that a Constitutional Parliamentarian Monarchy would have bene the best choice in both nations. But idiots for some reason love "Democracy", even though most really have no idea what that means.
 
I never served on the Tarawa class, but I remember my time on the USS Iwo Jima all to well. God we all hated that thing, being packed in like sardines.


The Marines seemed to enjoy the Inchon LPH-12. I retired off the "Chon" in 1997 after 3 1/2 years. If I remember right, the "Chon's" Marine berthing was better than the "Iwo" and had a few ship-alts done on the berthing ventilation & A/C. When the ship converted to the to the centrifugal A/C plant systems during our yard period in Pascaguola, the Marine berthing was like ice afterwards..
 
A lot of this has to do with objective.

What is the objective in the conflict itself?

Well, in pretty much all of the conflicts you listed, the objective was met. The Taliban are no longer in control of Afghanistan. Iraq no longer controls Kuwait. The Ba'ath Party is no longer in control of Iraq. So tell me, where did the military loose?

Anything beyond the achievement of the mission is not military, it is politics. And that is a completely different subject all together.

And BTW, I even include Vietnam in that.

In 1973, the Paris Peace Accords were signed. Part of that agreement was that the US would leave South Vietnam, and that North Vietnam would never again attack their Southern neighbor.

In other words, war won.

The fact that the North was dishonest and attacked anyways was political, and the fact that the US failed to respond to their ally as promised criminal. But the war was in fact won, it was the politicians that blew it.

You do not seem to be able to differentiate the difference between military goals and objectives, and political ones. Do not confuse the two, they are very different.

Like in WWII, what were the objectives? To defeat the Axis powers, or to completely destroy their governments and replace them with democracies?

Because guess what? In 1 of the 3, we failed. Japan is still a Monarchy, in fact it is the oldest Monarchy on the planet. But the military goal was met, their military power was largely destroyed and they capitulated. The rest is simply politics.

Myself, I think the most boneheaded thing we did was to insist that both nations become Democracies. Democracies are by nature the most unstable governments there are. Placing an unstable government in charge of an unstable region is a recipe for disaster.

I have been saying for over 15 years that a Constitutional Parliamentarian Monarchy would have bene the best choice in both nations. But idiots for some reason love "Democracy", even though most really have no idea what that means.


Noticed a long time ago at different internet discussion boards that retired career military personnel who are active posters have a lot in common with the retired LTG Michael Flynn.

I'm talking from before Flynn came along only recently. Just presently referencing Flynn as a person of a certain attitude and beliefs that are inconsistent with the Constitution they've sword to respect, honor, protect and defend.

Flynn was for instance a wild man at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, to the point the retired Admiral Mike Mullen who's former chairman of JCS wrote against it in the NYT. Admiral Mullen said Flynn's "lock her up" stuff wuz waaay out of line for a retired flag officer. Flynn's whole shtick not only the one particular moment.

Admiral Mullen is testimony however that not all retired career military lifer types arrived in pods from deep space. Rather, almost all are of the ones we read at a given web forum and over time. The retired career lifer NCO types especially and in particular. A can of assorted nuts, to put it mildly, the retired lifer NCOs. Which is why the consumer invariably picks and chooses. Then washes his hands.

In short, the post is bizarre enough but then the final sentence is really final. Unhinged extreme final. Finding U.S. military victories post 1945 does indeed constitute a flying trapeze series of stunts and breathtaking arcs that can only be executed in a direct defiance of gravity. Which means it can't be done nohow.
 
Last edited:
Noticed a long time ago at different internet discussion boards that retired career military personnel who are active posters have a lot in common with the retired LTG Michael Flynn.

I'm talking from before Flynn came along only recently. Just presently referencing Flynn as a person of a certain attitude and beliefs that are inconsistent with the Constitution they've sword to respect, honor, protect and defend.

Flynn was for instance a wild man at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, to the point the retired Admiral Mike Mullen who's former chairman of JCS wrote against it in the NYT. Admiral Mullen said Flynn's "lock her up" stuff wuz waaay out of line for a retired flag officer. Flynn's whole shtick not only the one particular moment.

Admiral Mullen is testimony however that not all retired career military lifer types arrived in pods from deep space. Rather, almost all are of the ones we read at a given web forum and over time. The retired career lifer NCO types especially and in particular. A can of assorted nuts, to put it mildly, the retired lifer NCOs. Which is why the consumer invariably picks and chooses. Then washes his hands.

In short, the post is bizarre enough but then the final sentence is really final. Unhinged extreme final. Finding U.S. military victories post 1945 does indeed constitute a flying trapeze series of stunts and breathtaking arcs that can only be executed in a direct defiance of gravity. Which means it can't be done nohow.

A lot of typing for what is little more than an ad hominem attack on career military veterans.

Calling a clear, concise and logically sound post "bizarre" is itself an example of a bizarre post. The points raised are valid and you have nothing to refute them with.

I would think a lieutenant in the US Army, with the added ROTC background would be able to distinguish between military actions and political actions.

I must be wrong.

Go back to regurgitating anti China talking points.
 
Last edited:
It well may be that CCP Boyz in Beijing have finally quit on taking any military action against the U.S. or South Korea if Trump hits the Norks nuclear facilties and programs only. As long as there's no invasion of the North by U.S. and Seoul.

Global Times which is an official CCP media dominated by the PLA told fat man little boy Kim if he does another nuclear test Beijing won't oppose the U.S. taking out the nuclear facilities and missiles and sites. The editorial said CCP Boyz in Beijing know Trump will likely hit 'em hard in Pyongyang if Kim does another nuclear test and if so, then so be it.

Global Times said surgical strikes would be okay. Fat man little boy Kim looks really screwed at this point...


Global Times: China could accept surgical strike on North Korea

But forces moving past the DMZ would spark military intervention

BY KANG JIN-KYU

A Chinese state-run newspaper said China would not engage militarily if the US conducted a surgical strike on North Korea’s nuclear facility, noting it would only resort to diplomatic channels to oppose such a move.

Beijing’s position was stated in an editorial in the state-run Global Times, a tabloid controlled by China’s Communist Party.

“If Pyongyang’s unwavering pursuit of its nuclear program continues and Washington launches a military attack on North Korea’s nuclear facilities as a result, Beijing should oppose the move by diplomatic channels, rather than get involved through military action,” Joongang Daily translated the editorial as saying.

Beijing also warned that if Chinese living in areas close to the site of the underground nuclear test were affected by any kind of leakage or pollution, it could take “any reaction” that would “alter China’s handling of North Korea’s nuclear ambitions,” without elaborating how.

A government official told the JoongAng Ilbo on Sunday that such messages to Pyongyang were entirely new. “What has been noteworthy in recent coverage by the Global Times is that China should cut off its petroleum supply to North Korea in case of the latter’s further provocation and that it could withstand a U.S. military action to some degree, both of which are stances that have long been considered taboo,” said the official, who asked to be unnamed.

China, however, warned of its full-scale military intervention if Washington and Seoul advance ground troops beyond the inter-Korean border to take over its Communist ally, saying it would not “sit back and watch foreign military forces overthrow the Pyongyang regime.”

Global Times: China could accept surgical strike on North Korea | Asia Times

kang.jinkyu@joongang.co.kr


With Trump making new statements a few hours ago about a "major major conflict with North Korea," it could look like Beijing has put up the green light, with clear restrictions and limitations. CCP have been clear and have acted at the UN and elsewhere as 100% opposed to a nuclear Korean peninsula.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom