# About china's aircraft carrier...



## mike_cos (Aug 15, 2011)

It seems that China is willing to launch its first aircraft carrier by 2015... and by 2020 will equal the american supremacy in the seas.... your opinions?...

SOURCE: The Diplomat


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 15, 2011)

We're decreasing R&D and military spending at the same time China is increasing theirs.  We're going to be downsizing our military at the same time China is building up.  At the rate they're stealing secrets from us, it's not going to be long before we lose our technological edge.  China's power-projection capability is going to have some very chilling effects on US economic, military, and political affairs.


----------



## mike_cos (Aug 15, 2011)

From what I understand you say it's just a matter of time... what were the factors that affected the most? Political , social or economic? I mean, 9/11, Obama, double deep?


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 15, 2011)

Political.  Every other instrument of national power (military, information, law enforcement, intelligence, financial, economic) stems from our political system.  Next most important is economic.  With both of those in disarray, everything else is going to be adversely affected.


----------



## AWP (Aug 15, 2011)

Equal us by 2020? I seriously doubt that.

Make control of the seas a very bloody battle? That I can see.


----------



## mike_cos (Aug 15, 2011)

Yet it seemed to me that the U.S. had lost sight of the China because they are too involved in the fight against AQ worldwide... but you are absolutely right when you say that you have in disarray political and economical system... (but it's a problem of almost all the western states today)


----------



## mike_cos (Aug 15, 2011)

Freefalling said:


> Equal us by 2020? I seriously doubt that.
> 
> Make control of the seas a very bloody battle? That I can see.


The article says 2020-2040..... and I'm afraid you're right.. very bloody battle...


----------



## AWP (Aug 15, 2011)

All the more reason to embrace the Indians and dissolve Pakistan.


----------



## mike_cos (Aug 15, 2011)

Freefalling said:


> All the more reason to embrace the Indians and dissolve Pakistan.


Good idea!.... dangerous, but very fucking good idea....!


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 15, 2011)

mike_cos said:


> It seems that China is willing to launch its first aircraft carrier by 2015... and by 2020 will equal the american supremacy in the seas.... your opinions?...
> 
> SOURCE: The Diplomat



They've just finished sea trials for the training carrier. 2020 is optimistic, if not sheer fancy.


----------



## Manolito (Aug 15, 2011)

I know it is easy for you to believe the Navy has just sat on its backside while the rest of you fought the wars in the sand. There is a saying that goes something like this. There are US Nuclear Submarines in the oceans of the world and the rest are targets. Russia was never able to quiet their subs so we couldn't follow them I can assure you if we quit making anything new for the next fifty years we will be the dominant force in the oceans of the world. There are a lot of little countries that aligned themselves with Mother Russia so they could rattle the can and act like Mother would defend them. If the Iraq army bit the big bananna in less than ten days how can a Pakistan hope to rattle the can. So they go out and kiss some Chinese ass and hope that buys them a ticket to the big game. Remember a carrier is only a platform and the battle group is only carrier protection. The terror of a carrier is its air wing and you don't believe the Chinese have a plane capable of defeating all plains the US could and would place in the fight?
I don't buy it Mike


----------



## mike_cos (Aug 16, 2011)

Manolito said:


> I know it is easy for you to believe the Navy has just sat on its backside while the rest of you fought the wars in the sand. There is a saying that goes something like this. There are US Nuclear Submarines in the oceans of the world and the rest are targets. Russia was never able to quiet their subs so we couldn't follow them I can assure you if we quit making anything new for the next fifty years we will be the dominant force in the oceans of the world. There are a lot of little countries that aligned themselves with Mother Russia so they could rattle the can and act like Mother would defend them. If the Iraq army bit the big bananna in less than ten days how can a Pakistan hope to rattle the can. So they go out and kiss some Chinese ass and hope that buys them a ticket to the big game. Remember a carrier is only a platform and the battle group is only carrier protection. The terror of a carrier is its air wing and you don't believe the Chinese have a plane capable of defeating all plains the US could and would place in the fight?
> I don't buy it Mike


Probably you are right Bill... but don't underestimate the dragon....


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 16, 2011)

Manolito said:


> I know it is easy for you to believe the Navy has just sat on its backside while the rest of you fought the wars in the sand. There is a saying that goes something like this. There are US Nuclear Submarines in the oceans of the world and the rest are targets. Russia was never able to quiet their subs so we couldn't follow them I can assure you if we quit making anything new for the next fifty years we will be the dominant force in the oceans of the world. There are a lot of little countries that aligned themselves with Mother Russia so they could rattle the can and act like Mother would defend them. If the Iraq army bit the big bananna in less than ten days how can a Pakistan hope to rattle the can. So they go out and kiss some Chinese ass and hope that buys them a ticket to the big game. Remember a carrier is only a platform and the battle group is only carrier protection. The terror of a carrier is its air wing and you don't believe the Chinese have a plane capable of defeating all plains the US could and would place in the fight?
> I don't buy it Mike



Good points.  I kind of think of it like this, when our President wants to do some saber rattling, pretty much anything short of war, does he send in a submarine or a carrier task force?  Possession of a carrier task force is a huge step forward for the Chinese.  In the future, when there's some dustup over the Spratleys or mineral rights in Africa or... whatever, when our President sends in one of our carriers, the Chinese will be like, "That's cool, I've got one of those too," and the risks for major confrontation are much higher.  Moreover, the Chinese will be able to use their carrier task group to basically extort concessions from other countries.  "You think the U.S. is going to risk war with us over you guys?  No?  Then you better get with our program before our MiGs reduce you to dust.  Bitches."

As far as force-on-force between us and the Chinese, I think we'd win but I don't think we'd risk it.  By 2020 I'm not sure some of the tensions we have with the Chinese, like north Korea or Taiwan, are going to be worth fighting over.  And with Chinese weapons development, anti-satellite warfare capacity, and their cyber capabilities (likely based on technology stolen from us or developed by their scientists educated in our colleges), I think in the future they will be able to neutralize a lot of our current advantages.


----------



## Manolito (Aug 16, 2011)

I am not underestimating the Dragon Mike I am sure they are a real threat and Mara is in a better position than I am to know how things are now.
Is it possible the world is a better place with two super powers instead of one. If you are the only super power what incentive do you have to keep up the space program. We hitch hike to the space station now right?
Power is a strange thing and often needs balance on the other side to keep it from becoming corrupt. Even the US may need an opposing side to keep us honest and true to the cause of Liberty.
The Diesel Electric boats are very quiet and often worry people more than any other maratime threat. Their range is limited but they are very hard to detect when operating on Battery. Look at Janes fighting ships and see who owns a lot of Diesel boats. They may have a very real threat signature.
I would never say the Chinese are not a threat I just think it takes a long time to develop the tools of war and you can't just copy something and make it work all the time.
If you look back in time when President Carter was in office the world was sure the US was weak and incapable of competing with Mother Russia. A simple change of leadership brought about dramatic changes in the world and keeping hostages for example became a risky business.
As Europe struggles with its economy I have more faith in England and Italy overcoming their problems than I do a socialist regime like Korea or Cuba becoming a powerful projecting Nation.
Just my thoughts today and remember I was having a great time working research during the cold war and woke up one morning with a quiet ocean and all the sound signatures headed back to Russia. Then I had to go get a real job the cold war was over and I think the US has had trouble focusing ever since.
Bill


----------



## RetPara (Aug 16, 2011)

This is starting to sound like Ralph Peters old book "The War in 2020"...........


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 16, 2011)

Was it any good?


----------



## mike_cos (Aug 16, 2011)

well said Bill... great post... but probably two superpowers are better then one... at least split the costs of mantaining the world peace...LOL


----------



## Scotth (Aug 16, 2011)

Militarily, China is not a threat to project power in the near term IMHO. They could be a threat beyond there region but it won't be until 2040 or later.

The Chinese are just taking there first carrier, which is a retrofitted old Soviet shell, out for sea test. That boat appeared to be the ramp variety carrier. To think the Chinese are going to be able to produce 2 carriers by 2015 that can challenge our carriers is pretty optimistic at best and ramp variety carriers are no match for our nuclear powered cat launched carriers. I will need to see far more evidence before I believe the Chinese are able to project any power beyond Taiwan anytime in the near term.

Like Bill said in his posts there is a lot more involved in sea power then just carriers and without having all the pieces to the puzzle and equal capabilities there aircraft carriers are nothing more then a show piece for generating national pride.

For the US and it's military I think economics is the biggest problem we face. Regardless of who is sitting in the White House economics is what provides the $$$ to be spent on the military. With huge deficits the military budget won't be spared. Additionally, with the gridlock we are currently experiencing our economy is going to take far beyond this administration and probably the next before the economy will be fixed.

The President can be pro-military or anti-military and it won't make a difference, we don't have the money today to spend on the military. Democrats don't spend on the military traditionally and the Republicans are content with economic disaster because they want to dismantle social programing and they aren't willing to participate in fixing the economy until they get those cuts. Even more dangerous is some of the tea party freshman are more then willing to cut defense which isn't a traditional position for Republican's and will make it easier for Defense cuts to take place because the House Republican's won't protect it. The Defense budget just took a $400 billion cut in the last round of cuts and it will take more unfortunately.

China is kind of like the Soviets were 30-40 years ago. I think we over estimate there capabilities and make them into the bigger bogey man then they really are. The Chinese economy is dependent on the US and there economy is slowing as well. They are huge and so is there economy and that is a threat but it also makes them fragile. They are hugely dependent on imports to keep there economic machine running. They have huge masses of people to support and huge borders that need guarding as well. The standard of living is starting to creep up as well. They're a problem that deserves our attention but I don't fear them as a military adversary anytime soon. I fear there computer hacking far more then I fear there military today.


----------



## QC (Aug 16, 2011)

It's good that India is on our side. Their blue water navy's huge. As for The Chinese carrier, it's big and it floats. 

http://www.economist.com/node/21525960


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 16, 2011)

India still isn't sure which side it's on.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 16, 2011)

SpitfireV said:


> India still isn't sure which side it's on.



Not China's and definitely not Pakistan's.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 16, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> Not China's and definitely not Pakistan's.



But the US' and Russia's neither. They're still all over the place- sort of leftovers of NAM. Their FP is a mess.


----------



## yarles87 (Aug 16, 2011)

Robert Kaplan's take on the issue...

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/08/15/the_south_china_sea_is_the_future_of_conflict


----------



## Tunanut (Aug 17, 2011)

At the rate we are borrowing from China, won't they own us by 2020?


----------



## Manolito (Aug 24, 2011)

I have been doing a little look at Chinas ability to feed itself. During my look I found some interesting information. We import Wheat gluton from China WTF?
Very well hidden but the answer is-- it is cheaper than buying gluten we produce here in the US. Why do we allow this I have no idea.
We sure need to rethink our foreign policy regardless of who the POTUS is.
There is a lot of information on Chinas military build up but build up without intent puzzles me. If it is their intent to keep us out of an area I wonder if it is abad idea. Their submarine force could out number ours five to one soon. The latest nuclear sub has technology in sonar we used in the early 1980's. The problem is in their missile boats. We need to assign shadows to their missile boats and that takes away from our other duties.
Anybody have an opinion on their intent?
Bill


----------



## tmroun01 (Aug 24, 2011)

> We need to assign shadows to their missile boats and that takes away from our other duties.


Who is to say that the navy isn't already doing this?

As far as the Chinese carrier, IMO it sounds like threat inflation. Just like the air force in the 50's with soviet bombers. They tripled the number of bear bombers the soviets really had, and in turn received funding for more of their own bombers.

*Caveat: I'm not saying that the U.S. should just brush this aside, but the dates just aren't realistic, but hey neither is 10% growth in GDP for the last 10 years...


----------



## pardus (Aug 25, 2011)

SpitfireV said:


> India still isn't sure which side it's on.



That's most likely our fault.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 25, 2011)

pardus said:


> That's most likely our fault.



Yes but no at the same time. It's a combo of circumstances and attitudes from all parties. I'll expand later tonight (along with the other info I was going to get you).


----------



## pardus (Aug 25, 2011)

SpitfireV said:


> Yes but no at the same time. It's a combo of circumstances and attitudes from all parties. I'll expand later tonight (along with the other info I was going to get you).



Cool.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 25, 2011)

pardus said:


> That's most likely our fault.



OK it's not really the US' fault at all. It's a combo of the US supporting Pakistan back in the 60s (which you couldn't really call a mistake) and the Non Aligned Movement along with Nehru's lack Idealistic We Can All Get Along streak (which lasted until the Chinese kicked their arses). Because of NAM came a need to dissassociate themselves from any strategic alliances...until they signed a "friendship" agreement in the 70s to balance China. By this stage the US was already heavily supporting Pakistan so any dealing there were out. Then because of the Soviet Union's influence the Indian government became suspicious of the US- this legacy is left over today where there's still underlying suspicion of the US' motives.

That's it in a very small nutshell.


----------

