• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chinese missile could shift Pacific power balance

kirby

Alfrescian
Loyal
By ERIC TALMADGE, Associated Press Writer Eric Talmadge, Associated Press Writer – Thu Aug 5, 5:43 pm ET

ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON – Nothing projects U.S. global air and sea power more vividly than supercarriers. Bristling with fighter jets that can reach deep into even landlocked trouble zones, America's virtually invincible carrier fleet has long enforced its dominance of the high seas.

China may soon put an end to that.

U.S. naval planners are scrambling to deal with what analysts say is a game-changing weapon being developed by China — an unprecedented carrier-killing missile called the Dong Feng 21D that could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defenses of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles).

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — The USS George Washington supercarrier recently deployed off North Korea in a high-profile show of U.S. sea power. AP Tokyo News Editor Eric Talmadge was aboard the carrier, and filed this report.

___

Analysts say final testing of the missile could come as soon as the end of this year, though questions remain about how fast China will be able to perfect its accuracy to the level needed to threaten a moving carrier at sea.

The weapon, a version of which was displayed last year in a Chinese military parade, could revolutionize China's role in the Pacific balance of power, seriously weakening Washington's ability to intervene in any potential conflict over Taiwan or North Korea. It could also deny U.S. ships safe access to international waters near China's 11,200-mile (18,000-kilometer) -long coastline.

While a nuclear bomb could theoretically sink a carrier, assuming its user was willing to raise the stakes to atomic levels, the conventionally-armed Dong Feng 21D's uniqueness is in its ability to hit a powerfully defended moving target with pin-point precision.

The Chinese Defense Ministry did not immediately respond to the AP's request for a comment.

Funded by annual double-digit increases in the defense budget for almost every year of the past two decades, the Chinese navy has become Asia's largest and has expanded beyond its traditional mission of retaking Taiwan to push its sphere of influence deeper into the Pacific and protect vital maritime trade routes.

"The Navy has long had to fear carrier-killing capabilities," said Patrick Cronin, senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the nonpartisan, Washington-based Center for a New American Security. "The emerging Chinese antiship missile capability, and in particular the DF 21D, represents the first post-Cold War capability that is both potentially capable of stopping our naval power projection and deliberately designed for that purpose."

Setting the stage for a possible conflict, Beijing has grown increasingly vocal in its demands for the U.S. to stay away from the wide swaths of ocean — covering much of the Yellow, East and South China seas — where it claims exclusivity.

It strongly opposed plans to hold U.S.-South Korean war games in the Yellow Sea off the northeastern Chinese coast, saying the participation of the USS George Washington supercarrier, with its 1,092-foot (333-meter) flight deck and 6,250 personnel, would be a provocation because it put Beijing within striking range of U.S. F-18 warplanes.

The carrier instead took part in maneuvers held farther away in the Sea of Japan.

U.S. officials deny Chinese pressure kept it away, and say they will not be told by Beijing where they can operate.

"We reserve the right to exercise in international waters anywhere in the world," Rear Adm. Daniel Cloyd, who headed the U.S. side of the exercises, said aboard the carrier during the maneuvers, which ended last week.

But the new missile, if able to evade the defenses of a carrier and of the vessels sailing with it, could undermine that policy.

"China can reach out and hit the U.S. well before the U.S. can get close enough to the mainland to hit back," said Toshi Yoshihara, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College. He said U.S. ships have only twice been that vulnerable — against Japan in World War II and against Soviet bombers in the Cold War.

Carrier-killing missiles "could have an enduring psychological effect on U.S. policymakers," he e-mailed to The AP. "It underscores more broadly that the U.S. Navy no longer rules the waves as it has since the end of World War II. The stark reality is that sea control cannot be taken for granted anymore."

Yoshihara said the weapon is causing considerable consternation in Washington, though — with attention focused on land wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — its implications haven't been widely discussed in public.

Analysts note that while much has been made of China's efforts to ready a carrier fleet of its own, it would likely take decades to catch U.S. carrier crews' level of expertise, training and experience.

But Beijing does not need to match the U.S. carrier for carrier. The Dong Feng 21D, smarter, and vastly cheaper, could successfully attack a U.S. carrier, or at least deter it from getting too close.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned of the threat in a speech last September at the Air Force Association Convention.

"When considering the military-modernization programs of countries like China, we should be concerned less with their potential ability to challenge the U.S. symmetrically — fighter to fighter or ship to ship — and more with their ability to disrupt our freedom of movement and narrow our strategic options," he said.

Gates said China's investments in cyber and anti-satellite warfare, anti-air and anti-ship weaponry, along with ballistic missiles, "could threaten America's primary way to project power" through its forward air bases and carrier strike groups.

The Pentagon has been worried for years about China getting an anti-ship ballistic missile. The Pentagon considers such a missile an "anti-access," weapon, meaning that it could deny others access to certain areas.

The Air Force's top surveillance and intelligence officer, Lt. Gen. David Deptula, told reporters this week that China's effort to increase anti-access capability is part of a worrisome trend.

He did not single out the DF 21D, but said: "While we might not fight the Chinese, we may end up in situations where we'll certainly be opposing the equipment that they build and sell around the world."

Questions remain over when — and if — China will perfect the technology; hitting a moving carrier is no mean feat, requiring state-of-the-art guidance systems, and some experts believe it will take China a decade or so to field a reliable threat. Others, however, say final tests of the missile could come in the next year or two.

Former Navy commander James Kraska, a professor of international law and sea power at the U.S. Naval War College, recently wrote a controversial article in the magazine Orbis outlining a hypothetical scenario set just five years from now in which a Deng Feng 21D missile with a penetrator warhead sinks the USS George Washington.

That would usher in a "new epoch of international order in which Beijing emerges to displace the United States."

While China's Defense Ministry never comments on new weapons before they become operational, the DF 21D — which would travel at 10 times the speed of sound and carry conventional payloads — has been much discussed by military buffs online.

A pseudonymous article posted on Xinhuanet, website of China's official news agency, imagines the U.S. dispatching the George Washington to aid Taiwan against a Chinese attack.

The Chinese would respond with three salvos of DF 21D, the first of which would pierce the hull, start fires and shut down flight operations, the article says. The second would knock out its engines and be accompanied by air attacks. The third wave, the article says, would "send the George Washington to the bottom of the ocean."




*The DongFeng 21 (DF-21, NATO code name: CSS-5) is a two-stage, solid-propellant, single-warhead medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) system developed by China Changfeng Mechanics and Electronics Technology Academy (also known as 2nd Space Academy). Developed from the JuLang 1 (JL-1) submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), the DF-21 was originally intended for strategic missions but its later variants were designed for both nuclear and conventional missions. The latest DF-21D was said to be the world’s first and only anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) system. The DF-21 has also been developed into space launcher and anti-satellite/anti-missile weapon carrier.


df21c_03large.jpg

DongFeng 21D (CSS-5 Mod-4)

The U.S. Department of Defense has confirmed the existence of the DF-21D land-based ASBM system, which is the world’s first and only of its kind. By combining manoeuvrable re-entry vehicles (MaRVs) with a terminal guidance system, the DF-21C is capable of targeting a slow-moving aircraft carrier battle group from a land-based mobile launcher. The maximum range of the missile was said to be 3,000km, possibly achieved by carrying a smaller payload.
 

kirby

Alfrescian
Loyal
Development History

August 1965 – The Chinese Premier Zhen Enlai ordered to start the development of the solid-propellant rocket technology. A design team was formed within the 4th Space Academy, and a single-stage ballistic missile design DongFeng 61 (DF-61) was proposed.

1967 – The PLA decided to build its first nuclear-powered missile submarine, and demanded a medium-range ballistic missile to be carried onboard. As a result, the PLA decided to abandon the DF-61 design and develop a submarine-based two-stage solid-propellant ballistic missile JL-1.

1970 – The design of the JL-1 airframe was separated from the 4th Space Academy and reassigned to the 1st Space Academy, while the 4th Space Academy concentrated on the development of the solid-propellant rocket technology.

df21_03large.jpg

DF-21 launch (Chinese Internet)

Early 1970s – The PRC made several major breakthroughs in developing the solid-propellant rocket technology. At the same time, the PLA began to explore the possibility of developing a land-based version of the JL- 1.

1975 – Two parallel development programmes were underway – the submarine-based JL-1 and the land-based DF-21, which share the same airframe and engine design.

1976 – The JL-1/DF-21 programme was reassigned to the 2nd Space Academy, which was previously responsible for the missile defence programme. Huang Wei-Lu was appointed as the chief designer. The 2nd Space Academy was also assigned to the development of the transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) vehicle, missile canister, missile testing and aiming, and other support systems for the DF-21.

May 1985 – The first successful DF-21 flight from Base 25 (Wuzhai).

May 1987 – The Second successful DF-21 flight from Base 25 (Wuzhai).

1987 – The DF-21A development programme was initiated. The missile features a 60% increase in its range.

1988 – The DF-21 MRBM was certified for design finalisation.

1995 – The first successful DF-21A flight test from Base 25 (Wuzhai).

1996 – Initial operational capability of the DF-21A was achieved.

DongFeng 21 (CSS-5 Mod-1)

The basic variant DongFeng 21 has a maximum range of 1,700km, and a payload of 600kg. The missile can carry a single 500kT nuclear warhead, with an estimated CEP of 300~400m. This version did not enter operational service.

DongFeng 21A (CSS-5 Mod-2)

df21_02large.jpg

DF-21A (Chinese Internet)

The DF-21A is the extended-range version developed in the 1990s. The PLA demanded a new land-based MRBM as a successor to its DongFeng 3A in 1985, and the contract with the CASIC to develop the DF-21A was signed in 1987. The development programme suffered from major setbacks in 1991, when two flight tests both failed. The PLA allocated additional funds to the programme in 1993 for an improved design. Four successful flight tests were carried out between 1995 and 1996 and the missile was operational by 1996.

The DF-21A has an increased range of 2,700km, and an estimated CEP of 100~300m. The missile is believed to be configured for strategic missions only. The missile is carried inside a canister mounted on a truck-towed trailer for road-mobile. It was estimated that so far around 60~80 DongFeng 21 missiles and 30~40 launcher systems may have been deployed by the PLA Second Artillery Corps in 7 missile brigades:

* 802 Brigade
* 807 Brigade
* 808 Brigade
* 809 Brigade
* 811 Brigade
* 822 Brigade
* 823 Brigade

These missiles are generally deployed in areas closer to China’s borders to ensure adequate target overage of areas previously covered by the DF-3 IRBM, which has a longer range, but is less accurate compared to DongFeng 21. There have reports suggesting that some DongFeng 21 MRBMs have been re-fitted with conventional warheads.



DongFeng 21C (CSS-5 Mod-3)

First revealed in 2006, the DF-21C is a conventionally-armed MRBM system with upgraded mobile launcher and guidance system. The missile was said to have a payload of 2,000kg and a maximum range of 1,700km. Unlike the road-mobile DF-21A, the DF-21C is mounted on a 10X10 WS2500 TEL vehicle, which offers some limited off-road travelling ability. The new GPS-based guidance system has reduced the missile’s CEP to 30~40m, enabling it for precision-strike missions.
 

kirby

Alfrescian
Loyal
41MeGdqjSKL.jpg


Fortifying China explores the titanic struggle to turn China into an aspiring world-class military technological power. The defense economy is leveraging the country's vibrant civilian economy and gaining access to foreign sources of technology and know-how. Drawing on extensive Chinese-language sources, Tai Ming Cheung explains that this transformation has two key dimensions. The defense economy is being reengineered to break down bureaucratic barriers and reduce the role of the state, fostering a more competitive and entrepreneurial culture to facilitate the rapid diffusion and absorption of technology and knowledge. At the same time, the civilian and defense economies are being integrated to form a dual-use technological and industrial base. In Cheung's view, the Chinese authorities believe this strategy will play a key role in supporting long-term defense modernization.

For China's neighbors and the United States, understanding China's technological, industrial, and military capabilities is critical to the formulation of economic and security policies. Fortifying China provides crucial insight into the impact of China's dual-use technology strategy. Cheung's "systems of innovation" framework considers the structure, dynamics, and performance of the defense economy from a systems-level perspective.


*About the Author
Tai Ming Cheung is a Research Fellow at the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation and Assistant Adjunct Professor at the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California, San Diego. He is the author of China's Entrepreneurial Army. He was a China and defense correspondent for Far Eastern Economic Review for several years and has worked as a securities and political risk analyst in Hong Kong and Japan.
 
Last edited:

kirby

Alfrescian
Loyal
China employs a range of “anti-stealth” and similar ‘asymmetrical’ air-defenses. These not only attempt to target stealth aircraft but also to shoot down or prevent cruise missile and precision guided weapons attack.

Foremost among these in my opinion are the anti-satellite program (“Space Denial”). These can disrupt/prevent GPS and spy satellites thus drastically improving the PLAs chances in any scenario with US. Also, because satellites are unmanned shooting them down is politically lightweight in times of limited warfare.

The main anti-satellite weapon of PLA is a ground based ASAT missile called KS-19 by western observers. The missile resembles a ballistic missile and is possibly based on the DF-21 or DF-25 missiles. The weapon was successfully tested in 2007 shooting down a satellite at over 500km altitude.

pic56.jpg



Another anti-satellite weapon that China is reported to employ is a very powerful laser. The US complained that China was dazzling their spy satellites with lasers – it’s only a question of ramping up the power and dazzling becomes destroying. The laser is probably not mobile.

Both of the above systems appear relevant should China develop anti-ballistic missile weaponry also.

Closer to earth, China uses long wavelength radars which are probably able to detect stealth aircraft in some conditions, although they are not fine enough to use for engagement by missiles. Another potential ‘anti-stealth’ system are the passive detection systems which appear to be deployed with HQ-9 SAM batteries. The main noted type is the DWL002 although similar but distinct trailer mounted systems are also in service.

pic57.jpg




The Strategic Missile Force (SMF), also known as the Second Artillery Corps, is the strategic missile branch of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), controlling all of PRC’s land-based strategic missile assets as well as the majority of its conventional theatre missile assets. The force is estimated to have a total strength of 90,000~100,000 personnel, most of which are in engineering and construction units. Actual missile operators and guards are probably less than half of the total strength. All SAC units are subject to strict command and control from the CMC. Orders are passed down to operational units via a four-level chain of command: CMC, missile bases, missile brigades, and launch battalions.

The SMF is believed to be equipped with 110~140 nuclear-armed strategic missiles, including 15~20 DongFeng 3 (CSS-2) IRBMs, 15~20 DongFeng 4 (CSS-3) IRBMs, about 20 DongFeng 5 (CSS-4) ICBMs, and 60~80 DongFeng 21 (CSS-5) MRBMs, all of which carry a single warhead. The new-generation DongFeng 31 (CSS-9) began deployment in 2007 and its improved variant DongFeng 31A is also close to operational deployment. Additionally, the SAC is equipped with 900~1,000 conventional theatre missiles, including the DongFeng 15 (CSS-6) and DongFeng 11 (CSS-7) SRBMs. In recent years, the SMF has also began the deployment of the DongFeng 21C (CSS-5 Mod-3) conventionally-armed MRBM and the DH-10 land-attack cruise missile (LACM).

Currently the SMF has six operational missile bases, which are numbered from 51st to 56th. Four of these bases (51st, 52nd, 55th and 56th) are “Army Level” units, while the other two (53rd and 54th) are “Sub-Army Level” units, which are half grade lower in PLA’s hierarchy. The 22nd Base, also “Army Level”, located in Baoji, Shaanxi Province is officially known as the “Training and Experimental Base”. Western intelligence suggested that this base may also serve as a warhead storage facility.
 

kirby

Alfrescian
Loyal
On 15 December 1963, the then Chinese leader Chairman Mao Zedong said that China’s military strategy was defensive in nature, and therefore China should develop defensive (strategic) weapons as well as offensive weapons such as nuclear weapons and missiles. On 6 February 1964, during his meeting with Dr Qian Xuesen ('Father of Chinese Rocketry'), Chairman Mao again expressed his views on the importance of the missile defence capability. According to Mao, missile defence capability should not be dominated by the two superpowers only, and China must also develop its own missile defence weapons, no matter how long it would take. This conversation, later known as “640 Directive”, was cascaded to the whole defence industry as Mao’s order to develop a missile defence system that could defend the country against nuclear-armed strategic missile attacks.

On 23 March 1964, over thirty top scientists from across the Chinese defence industry attended a meeting organised by the Commission of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defence (COSTIND) in Beijing to discuss the feasibility of a missile defence system. On 10 May 1965, the Central Special Committee issued a notice to the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Ministry of Machinery Industry, China Academy of Science, PLA Artillery Corps, and Base 20, asking them to list the missile defence in their annual and long-term plans. A plan outlining the missile defence weapon development submitted by COSTIND was approved by the Central Special Committee in August 1965.

On 23 February 1966, COSTIND organised another conference to outline detailed development plans for the missile defence programme, which was given a codename “Project 640” after Chairman Mao’s “640 Directive”. Under the plan, the whole project was divided into five key sub-systems. Key elements of the project included the FanJi (“Counterattack”) series anti-ballistic missiles (ABM), the XianFeng (“Pioneer”) anti-missile super gun, and a land-based missile early warning network. The meeting also decided to speed up the building of a dedicated ABM test range and the development of the nuclear warhead for the ABM system. The project entered full-scale development in the early 1970s.

Under the instruction of the Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, the 2nd Academy of the 7th Ministry of Machinery Industry (Ministry of Aerospace Industry) was officially renamed Academy of Anti-Ballistic Missile & Anti-Satellite in 1969 to be in charge of the ABM system development. Its subordinated 210 Institute was assigned to the development of the anti-missile super gun. Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics was responsible for the development of the anti-missile laser. The 2nd Academy also began to develop the anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon technology in the early 1970s.

Project 640 faced enormous technical and financial difficulties from the very beginning. The country, troubled by its financial hardship and internal political turmoil of the ‘Culture Revolution’, was simply unable to support an expensive project like this. Additionally, the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union and later the closure of the U.S. Safeguard ABM system made an independent Chinese missile defence system seemingly unnecessary. After Mao’s death in 1976, the development of the missile defence began to slow down. In March 1980, the new Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping decided to cancel the whole project so that the country could concentrate on economic development.




### 30 years of mismanagement and 30 years of over achievement. ###




The People’s Republic of China (PRC) maintains the world’s largest military force, based on its manpower. The armed forces of the PRC comprises three integral elements – the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the People’s Armed Police Force (PAP), as well as the reserve forces and militia. The PLA, which encompasses the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Second Artillery Corps (strategic missile force) is the regular army, totalling some 2.3 million troops. The PAP has a total strength of 660,000 troops. Additionally, there are also 800,000 men in the reserve forces and about ten million militia. The planned defence budget for 2010 is approximately 532.115 billion yuan (about 78 billion U.S. dollars), a rise of about 37 billion yuan from last year's defense expenditure, Li Zhaoxing, spokesman for the annual session of the National People's Congress (NPC), told a press conference, though many believed that the actual military expenditure could be 2~3 times higher.


The Chinese armed forces are given three fundamental roles: to defend the country against foreign invasions; to maintain internal security and stability; and to engage in the economic development of the country. Under the Constitution of the PRC, the armed forces are under the absolute leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The Party guarantees its control over the military through a political system consisting of Party branches, political officers, and the political department implanted at every level of the armed forces. The armed forces receive order from the Central Military Commission (CMC) through the General Staff, General Political, General Logistics, and General Armament Departments.

The Chinese leadership has been trying to modernise the country’s military since the mid-1980s. The PLA has undergone three major force reduction programmes in 1984, 1997, and 2003, dropping its total strength from 4 million to the current level of 2.3 million. At the same time, older weapon systems and equipment that came into service in the 1960s and 1970s were gradually phased out and replaced by new designs. The PLA has also been reforming its organisational structure, doctrine, education and training, and personnel policies in order to fulfil its initiative of “fighting and winning a local war under the informationised condition”.

The current military modernisation process has three main focuses. First, the PLA has paid close attention to the performance of the US ground forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and is learning from the success of the US military in information-centric warfare, joint operations, C4ISR, hi-tech weaponry, etc. Second, the PLA is gradually building up its power projection capabilities, which will allow it to deploy forces not only within China, but also in peripheral regions. Third, the PLA is quietly developing the capability of rivalling a technologically superior military power through so-called “asymmetric warfare”, in order to deter U.S. intervention in case of war with Taiwan.
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Small matter. US/UK/miscellaneous allies totaling less than 100,000 forced a surrender of more than 1m Iraqi troops in Desert Storm. In WW2, Japan had 2m in China and 5m (including SEA invasion troops and homeland defence reservists) total. China under ROC had 3m troops. US/UK settled the whole WW2 issue with less than 1m combined.
 

uncleyap

Alfrescian
Loyal
Weather it is evolution or revolution, the world is a changing world forever, since the beginning of time and last for the eternity. The sun actually DON'T rise precisely at the same time each day if one capable of detecting / calculation / measuring / recognizing this fact. Military power shaped this planet and decided the existence and distribution of each survival - essentially since the ape & cave time, and it will continue to be the primary factor in future.

What have to change will have to change. Dinosaurs were around 170million years back. Gengis Khan ruled 8 centuries ago also, but like PAp says - Move On!:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin::rolleyes:
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
You know what's very little but helped a lot to win the Desert Storm? It's an aircraft called Buccaneer from the 60s that was almost on the verge of being scrapped when Desert Storm erupted.

It was supposed to be nuclear bomber. Yes, no kidding, big fuck in its heydays, could carry and drop nuclear bombs both from landed airbase or aircraft carrier. Nobody could really know where Brit nukes were coming from, if and when they come. The invention of nuclear missile submarines and introduction of US/UK Polaris multi-warhead nuclear missiles rendered the Buccaneer redundant, well almost.

Desert Storm allowed it the chance of a grand last hurrah, especially with the always reliable tradition of RAF pilots. They could fly below below 100ft sea level at half the speed of sound, not crashing and drop their bombs pinpoint.

What's 100ft? If you're living in HDB 12 storeys or above, that's over 100ft. What's the speed of sound? That's about 1,000km/h. F1 sportscar go around 200-300km/h and jet airliners average 700km/h. Concorde is best and fastest among jet airliners of course, can zoom twice the speed the sound, but it needs an altitude of some 30,000ft to do that safely.
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
China has come of age and scares the shit out of the Americans. No shit, this is coming from the Admiral of the US navy and their own military think tanks.

In another 10-20 years they could be the king of the world. The American lost their marbles when they went to Iraq and Afghanistan and tied themselves into knots thus giving China ample opportunities to modernise their armed forces. A lean and mean China is scarier to them by the day but will they live up to their pledge of "Peaceful Rise" or this :

attachment.php


They hated the Manchus but love their boundaries. There are already hundreds of thousands of Chinese in the sparsely populated Russian teritories of Siberia and Eastern Russia and the bears are eqally spooked as well. They masquaraded as traders but were mostly discharged soldiers given extra incentives to settle there. The same thing is happening in Singapore, isn't it ?


OK, Lesson learnt. They will send some virile Admirals and an armada of sex starved sailors to do the plunders instead of a dickless eunuch who had lost his Sam Poh Jewel. :biggrin:

qing%20dynasty%20map.gif


Britannia Rules the wave....Hahaha...That was so 19 century.
US Navy rules the seventh seas, the curtain is coming down. Show me the Money !!!

American decline started from when they turned from a nation of producers to a nation of consumers and McDonald and Taco Bell has a lot to answer for when they lose their once mighty empire. :biggrin:


us-debt1.jpg

Uncle Sam, please send me to Golden Mountain. wahahaha...:p:biggrin::smile::eek:
 

longbow

Alfrescian
Loyal
Much of this comes down to $$$.

It costs a lot of $$ to project power and much less to defend. This current anti carrier system maybe cost the Chinese $5B. The cost of a US carrier fleet with supply ships, Ageis ships, subs, support based probabaly cost $50B for the whole setup. So this is a 1 to 10 or 1 to 5 ratio.

If the Chinese spend $100B on it military can the US afford $1Trillion? I think the Chinese can easily spend $250B a year on its military and the US would have to put in at least $1 Trillion a year to maintain superiority power projection capability. I doubt if the US can afford to maintain this level of military spending. So its ability to project its power agains large nations will be limited.

Of course this equation is flipped around to any country wanting to project power to threaten the US. Based on 1 to 10 ratio, that country would need to spend $3 to $5 trillion a year to overcome US defence budget of $600B or so.

Yes US took over Iraq wi th 100K+ men. But how much did US spend?? I think it was like US$10B a month (excluding the sunk cost for the tanks and planes and trained man) or $120B a year. That $10B a month was logistics to supply 120K men, fuel, ammo, replacement vehicles. BUT NOT the equipment that army already had and brought in.

Last I saw, Iraq had a tiny military budget of under $5B and much of that was used during Iran/Iraq war. So US used a 20 to 1 ratio of $$$ to defeat nation that was sanctioned for years.

The problem for US is China can now keep up with the US based on this ratio. So I see future where the US has to work with the Chinese because they cannot afford to play hard nose with Beijing. Can the Chinese ever built a superior military over the US - no way in our lifetime. But given that it takes a lot to project power, China will become king of the hill in Asia.

Oh another thing. $200B in China goes a much longer way than $200B in the US. A lot of the US defence budget is eaten up by payroll and benefits. The avg US pte makes US$20K a year. I think the avg Chinese pte makes US$3K a year.

As for article on the various border conflicts - nothing surprising lah. china is a huge country with long border in an area with lots of strife, and lots of people so naturally there are disputes.
 

boundThunter

Alfrescian
Loyal
Good points. It is all about $$$ and affordability and the Yuan sure stretches a lot longer than the Dollars.

China should build more nuclear submarines as deterrents than surfaced ships to show off.
Aircraft carriers are practically sitting ducks in a hot shooting war with an equally well armed adversary. The Nuclear SSBN's are the real big sticks in any future wars by virtue of their incognito locations. When they achieved parity with the US in the submarine's department, the US will be checked mate.

The Americans are blinded by their own undisputed superiority in the last 60 years and getting complacent after the Cold War. In this time of technological advances by leaps and bounds, a lot of superior weapons don't take that long to roll off the assembly lines from their drafting boards. Since GW Bush tore up the ABM Treaty with Russia and since China had shown their prowess by shooting down a couple of their own redundant satellites, America had to take notice that the new kid on the block has crept up on them. American superiority depended on their ability to see their foes whilst their foes fight blindly. With the Chinese ability to blind them in any major conflict, the pin has dropped that a more level playing field has arrived.

While they stupidly spent almost a trillion dollars so far chasing some diaper heads around in the mountains of Afghanistan and contracting their war in Iraq to some dubious mercenaries outfits, their troop morale are at all time low. It is like the ghosts of Vietnam revisited. Whatever feelgood feeling after the defeat of Saddam's Army had since evaporated into despair. One dead American soldier a day through suicide is just not good statistic and last month, they had the most casualties in Afghanistan since the war started. Whatever strategies they employed don't seem to work anyway.

Their intention on taking over Central Asia seemed to backfire on them badly. Instead of containing China and Russia, they are losing their pants. Some empires were lost through over-estimation of their own invulnerability and infallibility.

At the rate things are unfolding, China doesn't have to achieve parity because US is going to self implode economically.

Even Iran, North Korea and Venuzuela are sniping at their heels...
 

longbow

Alfrescian
Loyal
My feeling is that US will remain bogged down in Afghanistan for another 5 to 10 years. By then the military will be totally demoralized, the coffers will be empty. As it is Pentagon is only requesting funds to sustain the current cost in Afghanistan and Iraq. But there is still the cost for wounded soldiers, cost to replace military equipment... I think from now till disengagement is another US$1.5Trillion.

At that time, pressure will be to disengage from some parts of the world. Of course Israel, Saudi/Middle East oil will remain important areas where military will stay engaged. But there is little political will for them to stay and fight over South Korea or Taiwan or Africa.

The Chinese are fully aware of this and will naturally step up to the power vacuum. My feel is that Chinese are not really interested in acquiring territory. What they want is access to natural resources so that they can supply their economic machinery and sell products to these countries thereby enriching the lives of Chinese citizens. Why bomb your customers?

Short of some major territorial war - Tibet, taiwan - China really has no interest in wars. And they do not have the political will for confrontation. After years of one child policy, each dead soldier has a wife and 2 set of parents behind them crying bloody murder.

In military weaponary it is all about money and the mfg infrastructure. The Soviets diverted close to 70% of their hopeless central planned economy into their military for 40 years. So you have a bunch of great technology coming from there but country went broke doing so.

Going forward, the Chinese will divert more $ into R&D but unlike the Soviets the Chinese have a vibrant economy (capitalist system) that is growing rapidly. They also have a huge sophisticated mfg base from cheap plastic flowers to advance carbon fiber.

Many scoff at their most recent fighter and I agree that it is at best a first attempt. But there is no shortage of brains in China. Students are free to study aeronatical engineering, or mechanical engineering in top US schools. So this means the know how is there and they just need the funding. And I think the funding and priority is there.

As for carriers - they chinese will probably build a few small carrier for region operations as well as flattern the learning curve on how they work. I would not be surprised if they have a profit motive to know how to built small carriers - they can be sold to up and coming third world countries. But Chinese carrier will be used more as a coastal support and in times of national disasters. A carrier is a great platform to launch helicopters, provide medical support, water distillation, etc etc. So a useful piece of equipment. Also there is the pride aspect of making port of calls.

Subs - it is relatively cheap to have super quiet electric diesel subs. Great for coastal defence and very hard to detect. But it will cost $3B to build a large undetectible nuclear sub that can stay submerge for months on end. Again it is 1 to 10 ratio. Defend vs power projection. Chinese could build 15 to 20 very quiet diesel electric subs to defend their coast line. Ok their endurance is limited but hey great for under 500 miles coastal protection and very hard to detect.
 
Last edited:

longbow

Alfrescian
Loyal
Personally, I do not think US will implode. It is not that US will get smaller or weaker. It is just that China is getting much stronger. US just need to get its priorities right going forward
 

manokie

Alfrescian
Loyal
My feeling is that US will remain bogged down in Afghanistan for another 5 to 10 years. By then the military will be totally demoralized, the coffers will be empty.

The US Coffers will never be empty :mad:
The whole world is paying for our expeditions! :biggrin:
 

boundThunter

Alfrescian
Loyal
Personally, I do not think US will implode. It is not that US will get smaller or weaker. It is just that China is getting much stronger. US just need to get its priorities right going forward

Even if they got their priority right, that might be too late. They seem to be throwing good money after the bad money and what this created are a bunch of super rich Americans that don't pay enough tax.

Their first mistake was they consumed more than they produced.
Their compounded mistake was they have "something too big to fail." They had had the perfect opportunity to right those wrongs but they squandered that away in the selective bailouts of those mega banks. In a nutshell, they rewarded the crooks and punished the hardworking people.

They are at the abyss and whether they're going to tip over remains to be seen but the prognosis is not good at all. Subprime was just the entree, the mains are yet to come. They're freefalling without parachutes. Their Social Security is officially in the red for the first time in 30 years.

It was only a matter of time, but it's finally happened: The nation's Social Security system will pay out more than it takes in this year and next, as aging baby boomers begin entering retirement. The milestone marks the first time in nearly 30 years that the system is in the red, according to a report issued Thursday by federal officials overseeing the program.

The shortfall has been exacerbated by the recession and high employment, which have reduced payroll tax revenues. Long term, however, Social Security's finances stand to improve slightly, the trustees report said. A new tax on pricey health plans, part of recently passed health-care overhaul legislation that goes into effect in 2019, will result in more revenues.

Still, the plan's trust fund will be exhausted by 2037, the report said -- the same prediction it made last year. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, a trustee, urged lawmakers to move quickly to resolve the problem. "Despite the projection that Social Security can continue to pay full benefits for nearly 30 years, the sooner action is taken, the more options for reform will be available, and the fairer reforms will be to our children and grandchildren," Geithner said in a statement.

Pay outs from Social Security last exceeded income from payroll taxes in 1983, after more than a decade of a running in the red, CNNMoney.com reports. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed legislation increasing the withholding rate from 2% to 6.15% -- about where it is today.

Social Security paid $675 billion in benefits to some 53 million beneficiaries last year, the reported noted.

The trustees report also showed the new health-care law, much of which begins taking effect in 2014, should boost the fiscal standing of Medicare, the federal health plan for seniors. The program will remain financially solvent for 12 years longer than projected a year ago -- until 2029 -- because of cost-cutting measures included in the health overhaul bill, signed into law last March by President Obama.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/i...ut-health-care-overhaul-may-boost-m/19582730/
 

manokie

Alfrescian
Loyal
US should bomb a few Chinese ships to let them know that they are serious about maintaining peace in Asia :mad:
 

Cestbon

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
US coffer is empty not the debt reaching US$14 trillion. Each year adding at least US$1 trillion to the debt. Just 4% interest rate is good enough to slowly kill the US economy.
 

kirby

Alfrescian
Loyal
Brilliant response from the Chinese. El Cheapo Vs 5 Billion Dollars Carrier. This assymetrical weapon has just thrown the monkey wrench into the Americans' work.They have practically snatched back the sovereignty of the Taiwan's Straits with a single stroke.The range of this modified Dong Feng 21 missile is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces.

The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a U.S. supercarrier in one strike.

Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes.

Let's see if the Chinese will sell a few of these missiles to Iran and N. Korea for their defensive deterrence instead of being antagonised and intimidated by those pesky Americans day in and day out. Let the Americans do the worrying instead.
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
US should bomb a few Chinese ships to let them know that they are serious about maintaining peace in Asia :mad:

US and UK are never interested in peace in Asia per se. Some kind of wars must be stirred up now and then to keep their positions as self-appointed global police commissioner and police inspector, using UN as their rubber-stamp parliament. That's strategically and economically beneficial to them in both direct and indirect ways. In fact, many countries know that but play along because they'd benefit along the way too. These are their global police conscript reservists who now and then show up for show so that they'll get a share of the spoils. Singapore is one.

Russia and China have been trying to dislodge that for decades without much success, especially after the collapse of USSR. The other one with any say in this is France, which is caught in between neither here nor there deep enough to commit in any sense of commitment to either side.
 
Top