>
Posted on 09/20/2008 7:51:31 AM PDT by Flavius
>
That is extremely funny!!
OMG you’ve let out the secret that the B-52-VTOL is now operational!
Oh Boy ... did it now, huh?
Is that for the Air Force?
You’ll be Zotted for this.
ya think? We've only been using aircraft carriers since the 40's and if anybody's ever had the opportunity to be aboard one.... the LOGISTICS will kick your a##.
I'm not talking about fire control, fueling, aircraft maintenance, electronics, radar, sonar, communications, ....and on and on... just feeding those men/women is what amazed me. I couldn't even get to begin to understand how anybody on the flight deck stayed alive.
It looks like ants running around a bowl of spilled sugar with bottle rockets going off every couple of minutes...
The Chinese are real good at copying cr#p, but you can't copy institutional memory and the old academy of trial and huge errors.
Just cause you can build a carrier doesn't mean you can use it as an effective weapon platform without the support ships, protection and naval stategery that we've got.
All your carriers are belong to us, China. They'd make nice artificial reefs if we went "duke city" on each other.
you got that right. Lots of squids have sacrificed and paid the price of a steep learning curve for the US Navy. I'm not even mentioning pilots... but I'm waiting to see them go for their first night carrier landing.
I would so love to have a ship side seat for the festivities....
yep, that’s what I was thinking... nice photos...
Don't worry, I'm sure the next Dem administration would fix that. In a gesture of good will, they will simply have Chinese officers assigned to US carriers until they DO learn all there is to know about running a carrier.
Would you really want to be the LSO for that guy??? Or stuck in the island bridge?
Nope, I'd want to be about 3/4 of a mile away sitting on the deck of a yacht with a big screen tv with full playback capabilities and HD, video cameras with high speed and big lenses, some Swedish waitresses, unlimited amounts of beer and let the night carrier landings by the Chinese newbies begin.
Shown here being towed through Turkey to China.
Here is the Kuznetsov.
China has no intentions of naval engagment with the US. China's acquisition of carriers is a natural progression of their economic development.
They need only ask the worlds second greatest carrier force ever (Japan).
Your point is partly correct. Japan's carrier force was one of the largest in naval history (if not the second largest) that eventually ended in defeat. However, you need to consider the overall picture. Japan's overall industrial capacity was no where near that of the US during WWII. So, as Japanese ships were sank, they could not replace them anywhere near as fast as the US when American ships were sank. US steel production in 1944 exceeded 200 million tons. Japan; 1943, roughly 9 million tons. China, today, does not have such a deficit.
Bravo Sierra! China wants a carrier fleet for the same reason anyone else does; to project power. If they project too aggressively, all of that cheap Chinese steel will be on the bottom of the Straits of Malacca or the South pacific next to the Japanese fleet.
Projecting power is a means with which to defend the home country. Thailand, Brazil and Australia all have aircraft carriers. Not to mention Britain, France, and Russia. I don't see alot of military posturing on the FR in regards to these countries.
If they project too aggressively, all of that cheap Chinese steel will be on the bottom of the Straits of Malacca or the South pacific next to the Japanese fleet.
There's no need for China to expand "aggressively". Despite rhetoric inside and outside of China, there is considerable restraint on the part of China. Unlike other parts of the world (e.g., Russia, Al Qaeda, etc. should be America's real worry), China has chosen the market above all else.
So, there is no need for China to be agressive at all as more and more countries call China their largest trading partner. I predict, that someday, even the EU and the US would call China their largest trading partner. China doesn't need to go out to the world. The world will come to China. And as a result, it will be other countries that behave agressively towards China. Hence, the need for China to continue to develop her national defense.
Neither Thailand, Brazil, Australia, Britain, or France have made any territorial claims beyond their borders nor have they subjugated any of their neighbors in the last 100 years.
"China has chosen the market above all else."
Again, Bravo Sierra. (That's BS, for all of you Chinese agitators known to lurk on FR) China has chosen the market only as a means, not an end. Only when it completely renounces communism and totalitarianism should the rest of the world accept it into the brotherhood of civilized nations. Until then we need to keep our eyes open and our power dry.
Territorial disputes are nothing new. And many are settled peacefully, like the most recent agreement between Russia and China. Disputes with Taiwan, Japan and Vietnam will go down that same path too.
Until then we need to keep our eyes open and our power dry.
I'm sure that'll happen. The problem is, whatever US naval forces that are stationed around China will continue to be called elsewhere. That you can bank on. And on their way to their next assignments, will wave at Chinese merchant ships carrying cars to America :) Maybe GM's Chinese made Cadillacs :)
China is smart enough to not start a fight they don't think they can win, but has never shied away from one they don't think they can lost. That is why they have limited their bullying to small neighbors and their own citizens. Rest assured that China will never be allowed to achieve the might necessary to actually militarily threaten the US. When push comes to shove China can't eat those cars, but might have to try.
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.