Posted on 07/28/2005 12:24:00 PM PDT by Paul Ross
But being active in politics most of my life I've seen changes in our country's politics, military, congress and courts that seem add up to something evil.
It not only seems they no longer care what the will of the people is they are no longer trying to hide the fact that they do not care that I find very discomforting.
It's one thing to be lied to, that's bad, but it shows that there is at least some fear on their part.
It quite different to be just openly totaly ignored.
That means they no longer respect, fear or even care what the people think.
It's like both parties and all three branches know where they are taking our country and they don't care if we like it or not
Good thing our Seawolf and Virginia class subs are 50 years ahead of them.
2nd that and add:
Illegals Caught Working on US Military Aircraft
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1409715/posts
PROPOSED BASE CLOSINGS TO REVEAL LOSS OF INDUSTRY
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1408916/posts
Red dawn??
Panama’s President Ignoring Chinese Smuggling
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/8/22/100034
Chinese Enter U.S. Through Virgin Islands
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/8/10/214414
Gee let's make it easy for them. Let put all our egg in one basket /s
Sound familliar?
Sometimes I think all these people have been put under a spell or had a chip implanted (ala Invaders from Mars). Both parties doing a complete 180?
The model of what we're doing these days would be the two Iraq air wars. In fact, in his book about being the air boss in Desert Storm, Chuck Horner said the only time he yelled at anybody during the whole war was when a guy came into his office and suggested a geographical assignment plan for the air missions that was reminiscent of the Vietnam Route Pack system.
Times have changed.
I'm tempted to put on my tin foil hat and start believing that the Bilderburg group is really running our country. Perhaps the X-Files was right when it portrayed a secret govt behind our visual one.
Absolutely ... no question about it ...
And thanks for your service to our country.
Check out this long-delayed report now finally released...and being buried by our MSM.
Is it interesting to recall in contrast the cheery prognostications of uber-liberal Thomas PM Barnett, over at the USN War College (before finally getting fired this last December when he openly supported John Kerry), and ex-Freeper Poohbah, all through the last decade that such a war "will never happen."
China-U.S. Sea Showdown Predicted
By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS And ANDREW SCUTRO
DEFENSE NEWS, July 25, 2005
On July 19, the Pentagon finally released its annual assessment of
China’s military strength. It was expected months earlier but was reportedly held up because of its extreme sensitivity.
The 45-page, congressionally mandated report for 2005 finds that the People’s Republic has continued modernizing its armed forces to close a “perceived technology gap between modern Western forces and its own,” while refining its doctrine to include asymmetric and unconventional means.
The report estimates China’s 2005 defense budget to be $90 billion, behind only the U.S. and Russia, “the largest in Asia” and just a fraction of the U.S.’s roughly half-trillion-dollar defense budget.
The report — vetted by other agencies and departments — includes inventories of China’s intercontinental ballistic missile force, which can hit all of the United States except southern Florida. Its expanding naval and air forces as well as geopolitical considerations, like the demand for oil to fuel its economy, are highlighted.
Of particular interest to the U.S. Navy is China’s acquisition of eight quiet Russian-built, Kilo-class submarines and four Sovremenny-class destroyers. Any Chinese aspirations to create a global navy seem to be remote with the absence of aircraft carriers or significant replenishment assets.
Also of concern has been China’s possible development of over-the- horizon sensors and guided ballistic missiles for use against ships, although few details are given in the report.
China’s naval buildup is a natural consequence of its strategic position, an Asian affairs analyst told a Washington audience June 20.
“From a Beijing point of view,” retired U.S. Navy Rear Adm. Michael McDevitt said at an American Enterprise Institute seminar on future U.S. Navy strategy, “the vast majority of their outstanding, unresolved sovereignty or strategic issues are maritime in nature.”
As a result, McDevitt said, “control of the western Pacific by the U.S. Navy is certainly the greatest potential spoiler” of China’s ability to deal with those issues.
McDevitt, an East Asia expert with the Center for Naval Analyses’ Center for Strategic Studies, Washington, said the greatest combat threat the Chinese pose to the United States is a “tremendous capability to turn out a lot of conventionally tipped ballistic missiles.” Should the Chinese develop an ability to maneuver those missiles — rather than have them simply fall from a ballistic target track — “that would be a significant denial capability,” he said.
Bob Work, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, said concern about Chinese military expansion does not automatically translate into conflict. He said the U.S. Navy logically would take the measure of any rising and potentially competitive military power.
The Navy wants to maintain a “hedge against a disruptive maritime competition in China.” But, he added, such a hedge “doesn’t mean you have to fight them.”
McDevitt recommended several courses for the Navy to counter China’s rise in maritime power:
• Maintain air superiority in the Taiwan Strait as a barrier to Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
• Prepare to disrupt the targeting system China would use to control ballistic missiles, and develop a capability to destroy the missiles in flight.
• Improve its anti-submarine capabilities.
• Move more nuclear attack subs from Atlantic to Pacific.
The model for Chinese naval development seems to be “the Soviet Union sea-denial strategy, updated with Chinese characteristics,” McDevitt said, noting such a force would feature land-based aircraft carrying cruise missiles. The strategy includes using subs offensively, similar to what the Soviets did, and creating a “modest” amphibious capability “to deal with the Taiwan problem.”
The primary difference with the Chinese, McDevitt said, is a developing effort to create maneuverable ballistic missiles, something the Soviets never did. The threat, he said, is “the thing I think has most people in the U.S. Navy concerned.” But the missile’s targeting network “would be highly vulnerable to disruption.”
China has a vibrant economy because it is presently CINO (Communist in name only). They have given up attempting to control the economy, which has been wildly successful as a result. Therefore, by definition, they are no longer truly totalitarian. And since the very definition of communism, as opposed to other systems of government, is that it eliminates the market, China is no longer Communist in any meaningful sense of the term.
He/she went on with this drivel, but thats the jist of it.
Bump. Unfortunately we are well down the road. WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and soon FTAA, and now we are forcibly dispersing our defense procurement contracts to our supposed "allies" now... and when this is all done, then they have implemented "The New World Order." And remember when GHWB announced it back in '91....people were derided as conspiricists to have questioned his intentions. I know I didn't question the President at the time.
Now it is clear that some of them were privy to the real deal.
That is what the liberals have been saying in the DOD for 10 years. The liberal and Panda-Hugging Xlinton Mental Rot persists. Note the final expert's blathering "measured notes":
U.S. House Members, Experts Air China Concerns
By WILLIAM MATTHEWS, Defense News, July 28, 2005
The Pentagon’s report on rising military power in China is arming members of the U.S. Congress with new arguments for saving favored military projects at home.
For Rep. Rob Simmons, R-Conn., news that China’s submarine force is growing in size and sophistication is ammunition for the fight to save a submarine base in his congressional district.
“China already has more attack submarines than the United States,” Simmons said, citing Pentagon statistics. By 2025, China could have a three-to-one advantage.
“There is an alarming disconnect between the ambitious steps of the Chinese Navy and the Pentagon's shipbuilding plan used to justify closing sub base New London,” Simmons said after a July 27 House Armed Services Committee hearing on Chinese military power.
Del. Madeleine Bordallo, D-Guam, said a Chinese submarine has already been detected snooping around the military stronghold she represents. “Fortunately, it’s noisy,” thus easy for the U.S. military to track, she said.
At about 1,500 miles from China, Guam would be on the front line of any Sino-U.S. power struggle, Bordallo said. She would like to see Guam armed with F/A-22 stealth fighters, minesweepers and an aircraft carrier, she said.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, a longtime advocate of robust U.S. spending on defense hardware, warned that China is buying Russian arms — including “Sovremenny-class guided missile destroyers, sometimes referred to as carrier-killers” — and advanced fighter aircraft. They’re developing new space capabilities and expanding short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles.
“The United States cut defense spending for a decade while China’s increased,” Hunter complained. “This year, the president’s budget proposed cutting back on the F/A-22 Raptor while China is expanding its fleet of Sukhoi-30 Flankers.”
At the same time, a senior Chinese general “threatened to attack our cities with nuclear weapons if we intervened to stop aggression against Taiwan,” Hunter said. “Clearly, there’s something wrong with this picture.”
Committee members sounded far more alarmed about China’s improving military capability than the U.S. Defense Department does.
A report released July 19 by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld describes China as “modernizing its forces, emphasizing preparations to fight and win short-duration, high-intensity conflicts along China’s periphery.”
But the report does not depict China as entirely hostile. “We see a China facing a strategic crossroads,” it says. “The United States welcomes the rise of a peaceful and prosperous China.”
Two China experts called before the committee emphasized China’s combativeness.
Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center warned that “the government of China is in the midst of perhaps the largest military buildup the world has witnessed since the end of the Cold War.”
In addition to modern fighters, submarines and surface ships, Fisher said the Chinese military has “ground-based laser and new direct-ascent anti-satellite weapons intended to take out key U.S. space assets.”
Submarine-launched non-nuclear missiles and army special forces “could be used against U.S. bases as distant as Hawaii, Alaska and the U.S. West Coast,” he said.
Fisher warned of a new “maneuverable ballistic missile” that could be used against U.S. ships in waters around China. And he said missiles armed with “non-nuclear radio frequency warheads” could be used to destroy the electronic systems on U.S. ships, leaving them helpless in the water.
Heritage Foundation scholar John Tkacik said China’s expanding submarine fleet is highly worrisome.
“By my count, China will have a net gain of 35 submarines over the next 15 years,” he said. Chinese shipyards will probably out-produce U.S. shipyards, so that by 2020, China could have a fleet of 50 modern attack submarines compared with a U.S. fleet of fewer than 40, he said.
China “will likely have a home-field advantage” in any East Asian conflict as early as 2010, Tkacik said.
Franklin Kramer, who was the Pentagon’s chief of international security affairs during the Clinton administration, struck a more measured note.
“There is no question that the Chinese military is a potential adversary of the United States in the Taiwan Strait,” he said. But “the full context in which to understand China’s military power is multidimensional.”
China has been helpful to the United States in the war against terrorism, cooperating in intelligence matters and helping to interdict terrorist financial organizations, he said. And economically, the United States and China have very close ties.
As for military conflict with China, “I don’t think it is at all inevitable,” Kramer said. “An important goal of the United States is to help shave the decisions made by China.”
Doesn't look good, I'll have to admit.
I've more thoughts on this but have family matters to attend to. I'd like to keep the conversation going.
It means you busted your ass to get her ready and commisioned, just so some punk can come aboard en tell ya all about the fancy schoolin he got.
BTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.