Posted on 01/16/2008 12:53:42 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
Tense battle-ready standoff in Taiwan Strait
(Hong Kong=Yonhap News) Chung Juho = U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk (and its battle group) had 28-hour battle-ready standoff with a Chinese submarine and a missile destroyer in Taiwan Strait last November, it has been revealed.
This was the first military standoff between U.S. and China since the Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1996.
According to Jan. 16 dispatch by China Times in Taiwan, on Nov. 23 last year, Kitty Hawk battle group was en route to Japan after China refused its port call in Hong Kong, entering Taiwan Strait instead of using its normal route. China immediately dispatched a Song-class submarine which happened to be in the neighborhood, and had it track the battle group.
China also sent a missile destroyer Shenzhen from its Southern Fleet which was readying itself in Hainan Island for the (upcoming) visit to Japan, joining the Kitty Hawk watch.
The battle group with the carrier and its eight escort ships were sailing northward at an even distance away (from China and Taiwan,) and the Chinese submarine and the destroyer were following and watching the battle group from the western side along the Chinese mainland.
Carrier Kitty Hawk was alerted by a P3-C anti-submarine plane from U.S. forces in Japan that a Chinese submarine and its destroyer were following them. The group stopped sailing and went into battle-ready mode, sending out warplanes to protect the fleet.
After tense 28-hour standoff, the battle group was able to return to Yokosuka base in Japan only in Nov. 24.
According to an U.S. military source, the Chinese submarine sneaked into Taiwan Strait from west after taking a detour around Taiwan's southern shore from east, in an effort to monitor Kitty Hawk battle group. S-2T anti-submarine plane from Taiwanese navy was conducting the regular patrol in the area, but was not able to detect the submarine.
If China goes to war with us now, it's the best Navy and Air Force on Earth vs. a Navy and Air Force a fraction of their size with much less ability overall even before you compare size. Air dominance and control of the seas is likely early in the war. I'm not saying they won't hurt us (some of their subs will be hard to find) but they will lose in the air and on the seas very badly, very early.
Then what? China won't hurt us by invading its neighbors. The amphibious vessels in their current inventory can carry around 12,000 troops and about a hundred tanks at a time. Even if their escort vesels were available, what are the chances they could transit to Japan without being sunk?
Meanwhile, we're not looking to invade China. At that point, it goes to the negotiation table. Hopefully we can get Taiwan back if they've succeeded in taking it.
Now, that doesn't mean I don't think China is a problem, and I'll note they are feverishly building their amphib capability. I just mean that if they start something in 2008 they will have cause to regret it.
Those are dangerous waters for a carrier...confined, narrow, not a lot of room to manuever should there be a problem.
I have no doubts that the PLAN would dispatch at least one of their new, heavy DDGs and probably more than one of their newer (Song or Yuan class diesel electrics) subs. Those subs, in those waters are difficult to find, particularly if they are just waiting.
As to the older ROCN (Republic of China - Taiwan) S-2 trackers...they are very old. A updated P-3 has the sophistication to perhaps find a quiet diesle-electric in the right conditions...but this just punctuates how foolish it was (IMHO) for us to take the S-3 Vikings off of those carriers, particularly in their ASW mode.
Some pretty dicey stuff going on here resulting from the Chinese snub in Hong Kong.
China calls in all their debt at once. do we pay it and collapse our economy, or do we say, “no thanks, we’ll send you payments.”
You should also holster that stuff about the government putting “corporate greed” above defense. Many people believe that increased trade makes wars less likely. Whether they are wise to believe that about china is an issue, but thinking “trade prevents wars, let’s trade” is not remotely the same thing as “I don’t care who dies, I’m making money.”
Agree 100% with your post.
The press was told what declassification and gamesmanship determined they should be told.
The truth of what happened is classified. If you know, and are basing your discussion on what you know, you are probably violating classification. If you are speculating based on what you think, you do not know, because only those who have the appropriate clearance and need to know actually know, and they aren’t talking.
But using simple reasoning, if the plane contained anything that would compromise our security, we could easily have blown it up upon departure from the plane, or rigged it with explosives to blow up on entry, or even hit it with a cruise missle — if it was as serious as you suggest, the fallout from launching a cruise missle at our own plane in China would have been preferable.
Or it could be the administration royally screwed up.
If I knew, I wouldn’t be posting.
We should sell thme some, even if it means designing new boats just for them. Something diesel powered but with sonar like a Virginia class.
China is and has been planning for the next war.
We’re giving away our country and holding seminars for their navy.
Phillip II of Spain had the world’s strongest navy, too.
See my post 123.
Or DHS. Or ICE.
The debt isn’t “callable”. They could sell it on the open market, but even if they collapse our dollar, all they’ve really done is ruin their own valuation, thus rendering everything they’ve sold to us “free”, and destroyed their own economy because we won’t be able to buy any of their goods.
I’m not happy with the deficit, but I’m not that worried about China, they are kind of stuck with us.
Those are confined waters and a good diesle electric could probably get pretty close...but apparently a P-3 tagged one of them.
We certainly need to either re-instate the S-3 Viking in the ASW role, or put something equivalent on the carriers for their own strong ASW defense that has the electronic power and the legs to afford it. They will not always be in a position for a shore-bound P-3 to carry this water.
I'd be interested in knowing what the accompanying SSN saw...but we will never hear that story.
Easier said than done. The U.S hasn't built a conventional submarine for 50 years so it would mean starting from scratch. Easiest way would be to build some under license to a foreign design, but the best conventional subs are built by companies who won't take the chance of angering China. Starting from scratch is an expensive proposition. Add to that the fact that there are only two shipyards building submarines in the U.S. - Electric Boat and Newport News. They are currently building Virginia class SSNs for the Navy and I doubt that they have any spare capacity to take on a foreign order. So that would mean they would have to expand their facilities for a small foreign order, an extremely expensive proposition as well. So sure, a lot of talk is floating around about building subs for Taiwan but unless someone like Korea steps up to build them I doubt that they'll ever see the light of day.
I forgot about the callable/sellable aspect, but otherwise agree 100%.
Not sure if they are tweaking on purpose or not.
Oh, I have no illusions about that!
Of ccourse, because of the difficulties you've pointed out, the only decent soolution is to increase our sub force to the point that the Chicoms have to deal with a number of Virginias and LAs the minute they try something hostile.
Curious, why not?
It would seem that this is yet one more puzzle piece in a complicated economic pic.
Besides, I’m upset with these corporations lending bad money...and lots of it.
It may not be predatory lending, but these corps were thinking profits when they went out on a limb like that.
Now the whole market is stunned by the enormous losses....doesn’t make since that these corporations would jeopardize their health and the health of the nation like this.
Quix I don’t know how far I’m going to buy into all that, but I will say that we shouldn’t allow problems to fester that feed into this concept. I am against any policies that would enable something like this, and I do think at least a few of your observations do.
Which is precisely why I think transnational capitalism carried out to it’s maximum capibilities WILL ultimately be as destructive to our nation as an outright attack on our soil, and could even make that eventuality almost certain.
for later
thanks for posting
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.