Posted on 01/19/2009 7:16:06 PM PST by neverdem
I plead guilty to targeting wallmart. I have not crossed their threshold in several years, and I am not a cost co member, and I buy American when I can. I would have mentioned every other chain store in what is left of the USA, but I tend to keep my posts short. The idea sending my dollars to the baby killing Communists in China just to save a couple of bucks while hiding behind the excuse that I am hurting the unions is beyond even my conscience. Privately owned company’s that operate in China are required to sell stock to the communist party. The party gets a share of the profits that are generated, and are using that money to support their military goals. Every worker in China is a Union Member, but the party keeps the pay low and so they make more money to continue to build their military, and keep the party leaders rich. As for the scrap, “Sent” may be an inaccurate description, but in view of their aims at becoming a world power I believe I used it as hyperbole to point out how complicit we are with these goals.
Our navy is larger than the next several largest navies combined... and China's is not among the top ten... and China's navy is not tooling up for a fight against US ships in open waters.
I think we might avoid obeying short-sighted headline-logic before committing billions unnecessarily.
Where have you been for the last 8 years?
I refuse to believe, without some actual substantiating citations, that China is approaching our quality and quantity in any significant areas. Since you've been tracking this since 2000, I'm hoping you can back up this statement. Please tell us what areas of China's naval forces actually rival ours. Our fleet is, by far, the largest and and most advanced. Heck, I'll doubt that China can yet rival France or the Brits in a straight-up head-to-head naval fight. (Now the future may hold a different story, but for 2009, I won't fear China's navy without specifics.)
China is building a navy for just ONE reason.
A fast dash across the Taiwan Straits and overwhelming the Taiwanese Navy and any US/Japanese ships in the western Pacific,, with enough subs and aircraft to hold up any large response just long enough for “World Opinion” to force a U.N. cease-fire, with China in control of Taiwan, under the threat of a global nuclear war.
Most of those ships will be cannon fodder, but if they meet thier goals, then they have served thier purpose.
They are fielding their own VLS missile systems on their Frigates and their destoryers now controlled by very modern and sophisticated target acquisition and radars. The have developed and deployed PARS on their newer destroyers.
We have denuded and defanged our Perry class frigates to the point thet they are now good for only ASW operations, limited fire support with a single 76mm gun, and drug interdiction. The new Chinese Frigates are very competitive in all areas in that regard, and exceed our frigates in missile and aircraft defense significantly now.
Our destroyer fleet is better than theirs by far in numbers...but their newer ones are coming much closer in capabiity...and they are now capable in their ship building of building more and faster than we are.
The Chinese have developed and deployed aerial refuleing and AWACS capabilities that rival our own in terms of their basic function...meaning our absolute advantage and force multipliers in those areas have been significantly erroded...particularly if we have to operate close to their airspace.
They are adding very many new and capable SU-30 and SU-35 type aircraft, the newer ones licensed built there with their own newer electronics. Again, in the airspace close to their shores, they will be a very tough not to crack if a confrontation and crisis over Taiwan were to develop. For us, it would be better for it to come sooner rather than later with their growth trends. <> They are fielding advanced diesel-electric AIP submarines aorund their coasts and out to the 1st and 2nd island chains which are very dangerous to our own vessels and submarines in those waters. We have no such vessels, but clearly mantain a much higher quality and qauntity in nuclear attrack subs.
As a measure of how dangerous such SS subs are, and how seriously we take them, we ourselves (the US Navy) leased a Swedish sub and its crew for almost two years to try and fine tune our own acquisition adn targeting of such subs. They are very dangerous and offer the Chinese a relatively cheap defense (when compared to fielding dozens of nuclear subs) in the littoral and close-in waters we can expect to confront them in.
They are rapidly building new as well SSNs which have a LA or ADCAP LA class capainbility...not as good as Sea Wolf or Virginia...but a threat just the same, particularly if concentrated in any numbers...and particularly in scenarios where a operation could set several of their SS subs and one of their SSNs against one or two of our SSNs.
They have now produced 2-3 new SSBNs (and are building more rapidly) that are quite impressive when you look at where they have come from, Thir SLBM technology is now making them threats to potentiaally all of mainland America...if they can get into the ocean...and the entire west coast from where they sit in protected areas on or near their coasts. This is a huge balance shifter in the area, because they also threaten our allies from these moving ICBM bases that we would have a tough time getting at.
Now, do not get me wrong. Our technology and our maintenance and quantities in many areas still exceed theirs...but we are losing ground steadily and there are areas wher, as I say, they are nearing parity.
They are also focused in the WestPac, and so our overall numbers will not be brought to bear against them in one theater because we have too many other responsibilites and they know it.
Viewing the extensive infromation I have put together on that site is sobering when you consider the trends. We have signifiacntly downsized in the last ten years while they have been going forward like gangbusters. We need to recognize it and respond accordingly. That is the whole point.
You can lay a lot of that at the feet of Environmentalists, too. The most environmentally friendly steel mill ever built in the US was only used as a movie set before being dismantled and shipped to China. The regs had changed yet again as it was completed, and it never got into full scale production. It was sold to recoup losses.
ping
Thanks. See my posts 35, 40, and 46.
Well, during WWII, the US built roughly 25 Essex class carriers, thereabouts and about 50 or so light carriers. Are you suggesting we go into that same mode today? Except to build up the fleet of another 25 or so Nimitz class carriers? Not to mention the 5000 or so airplanes for them (F-18?). And their supporting ships and the wages for the crews.
Well, it'd be good for the economy.
No need for a World War production output at this point...just recognizing that if we stay strong and maintain, say a 600 ship Navy, that we might avoid having to do such a thing.
Sooner or later, we are going to bump into the Red Chinese. They are acting like they are preparing for it.
Well, you almost have your wish, the US navy has 11 carriers, of which 10 are Nimitz class. So, another 3 and you’d be there. I don’t know how many MEU’s there are in the US navy. Three according to wikipedia. Of course, building another 11 MEU’s would probably be cheaper than the 3 additional Nimitz class carriers.
Now we have 11, 10 Nimitz and the Enterprise. When the Gerald Ford comes on board, the Enterprise will be retired.
In terms of Amphibious operations, we have 11 total large deck Amphib Assault ships (Wasp and Tarawa) that make up the heart of large MEU Phibrons, with enough other vessels to put 11 at sea if necessary....except with maintenance, refit, and overhaul, you really are going to have only 5-6 completely available at any one time outside of a serious issue requiring a surge, in which case you may get 7-8 then.
14 of each would be better in terms of being prepared in the evnetuality of any serious challenge in one area of the world, while maintaining a strong posture elsewhere to ensure that nobody tries to coordinate and suck our forces dry in one area so that can come at us or our allies in another.
With 14, we could keep 7-8 deployed, or ready to deploy at all times while the others went through maintenance, refit, or overhaul...and we could surge 9-12 when necessary.
Well, yes, I suppose a 600 ship navy would send would be aggressors a message. But the US military is stretched rather thin. Maintaining so many bases does take away from new equipment. Also, many operations are funded by the US military that go into the local economy of where they are operating. Just the cost of the Iraq war alone would have been enough money to restore the navy to the Reagan era fleet.
To really address America's military needs, Americans do need to address the overall outlay of social benefits. About half of America's $3 trillion federal budget goes to paying out pensions, social security, etc. The other half is where the military budget of $600 billion comes from. And of course, much of that $600 billion goes into the local economies of where the US is operating.
Unlike China, they neither have operations overseas or provide a social safety net to their citizens (though that part will be changing).
I'm not convinced America needs to worry about China, but if I was, that's how I would address the issue, to reexamine all social outlays and America's military commitments overseas.
Thanks neverdem. I guess this might explain why I saw an article on Xinhua, titled something like, “China won’t seek world hegemony”.
Cheers!
I am well aware of how important it is to many Americans (especially good ol boys like yourself) that there is a clear US military advantage.
However, most Chinese are not interested in an arms race and are more concerned with economic progress. They will leave the arms race to people like you. Most Chinese want to see their navy add a few carriers. But most do not want to stretch their resources across the globe.
As long as Americans see it as their role, then by all means, send your own sons and daughters across the globe and let China's sons and daughters work for IBM :)
"Good ol boys" like myself?
I'm Minnesotan. Uffda.
As it is, I would much rather see the US remain the Arsenal of Democracy, than see it knuckle under to the Arsenal of Maoism.
Hint: many Chinese want to come to the States, and then stay. Happens with people from all over the world. Very few want to go to the Third-World economic disaster sites like China.
Cheers!
I'm Minnesotan. Uffda.
I believe the good ol boys are in all parts of the country. But you maybe right, a co-worker of mine (an African American) years ago told me I needed to be a little more mindful who I referred to as a good ol boy and said I didn't know what a good ol boy was until I lived in the deep South :) So, I take him at his word. He was from Mississippi.
As it is, I would much rather see the US remain the Arsenal of Democracy, than see it knuckle under to the Arsenal of Maoism.
You'll find more Maoist outside of China than inside China. And greater numbers in countries that have less people than some of China's cities. But most Chinese want a deterent force, but they in no way want to compete with the US in that area. Americans seem to value fatigues more than Chinese do. Chinese value the lab coat and business suit. So, I think there should be no disagreements. However, over the course of the next 4-5 decades, it will be increasingly taxing for Americans to keep that edge as China industrializes.
Hint: many Chinese want to come to the States, and then stay. Happens with people from all over the world. Very few want to go to the Third-World economic disaster sites like China.
I have no misgivings about China, I know they are still relatively poor. But I also know my history. Ireland was once one of the poorest country in Europe, along with Italy and Spain. Yet, today, those countries are classiefied as developed nations. Many came to the US to excsape their impoverished homeland. This was also true with Japan and more recently with South Korea (less Koreans are immigrating to the US than just a couple decades ago). South Korea is teetering on being classified as a developed nation, and yet, 50 years ago, it was an improverished agricultural society.
Heck, even the Scandanavians and Germans came over in large numbers (in the 1800's). So what assumption can we say about the homeland they left behind?
China is changing, so much so, that half the world's construction now occur in China. And I'm convinced, over the next decade and half, more than half the world's construction will occur. Some reverse migration is already happening with Chinese immigrants (the youth anyway).
Keep trying.
Cheers!
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.