Posted on 08/12/2011 10:29:30 PM PDT by robertvance
On August 14th, 1912, the United States launched its first aircraft carrier, the USS Langley. This 11,500 ton ship served during both World Wars until its luck ran out near Java in 1942 and had to be abandoned and sunk in order to avoid capture by the Japanese.
Almost one hundred years later, China has just launched its first aircraft carrier and the U.S. State department is demanding to know why.
"We would welcome any kind of explanation that China would like to give for needing this kind of equipment," said Victoria Nuland, a State department spokeswoman.
Let me give you the explanation, Victoria. China is the world’s largest country and has recently become the second largest economy behind the United States. China is also the undisputed powerhouse in Asia. Is that a good enough explanation for you?
(Excerpt) Read more at teachabroadchina.com ...
Whatever.
I don't believe anyone, not even in China, are talking invasion. Rather, China is building the economic and political structure, that overtime, will gradually steer Taiwan to be part of China.
I know someone who is from Taiwan. Born and raised in Taiwan. The family are descendants of those who retreated from the Mainland. She and many others, who have roots in Taiwan (but originally from the Mainland), believe that Taiwan is part of China.
The caveat is, that China become a democracy. There will always be a chasm until then. But once China becomes a democracy, I believe Taiwan becoming part of China will be a done deal. And without a shot being fired.
Faulty logic. Taiwan is an independent sovereign nation.(There, I said it again)
Economic and political "steering", if used in a manner that subverts the sovereignty of a country, is also undermining the foundations of that country.
Need an example - see illegal immigration and the economic and political results in the U.S.A. Same technique - same results.
I know someone who is from Taiwan. Born and raised in Taiwan. The family are descendants of those who retreated from the Mainland. She and many others, who have roots in Taiwan (but originally from the Mainland), believe that Taiwan is part of China.
And...?
Its a cultural anomaly you're describing - not a political reality. Chinese familial lineage is derived from the Father, not the Mother. If the Father was from a town/village on the mainland then the family is considered to be from the mainland. Example - a good friend of mine is a retired Taiwan Marine Colonel. Born and raised on Taiwan. But if asked, he will say that he is Hubei, from Hubei province on the mainland. Its a cultural thing. Not political.
BTW, I'm married to one of those people. Born and raised on Taiwan - But if you ask her, she's ShanDong...from ShanDong province where her Father came from. As time goes on, persons such are more and more in the minority here on Taiwan. Taiwanese national identity is growing stronger each day. In spite of the PRC/CCP apologists.
The caveat is, that China Taiwan(edit) become a democracy. There will always be a chasm until then. But once China becomes a democracy, I believe Taiwan becoming part of China will be a done deal. And without a shot being fired.
Again, faulty logic.
Also, Taiwan became a military dictatorship first. It only moved out of martial law and into free elections in the late 80s or so.
China will never become a "westernized" democracy. It will, IMO, move towards its own version of "free-market' economics - when its in Chinas' best interests - but it will remain a one-party ruled nation. It is too deeply ingrained in the Chinese psyche that there must be a strong central ruler. They regard that concept as correct and inevitable. Its how they think and its how they will progress.
Call it 'communist' 'oligarchical' 'fascist''tyrannical' or whatever nom de jure the Poly Sci 101 prof wants to use, that that is how China will roll. They want/need to have a central power to tell them what they can and cannot do and to help them when they need it. That way they can continue to go about their merry way knowing that they will have someone else to blame for their mishaps and f*ck-ups and not have to be personally responsible for their actions.
Thus endeth the lecture. Amen.
Well, there is a certain level of strong arming and economic enticement. Ironically, though, the strong arming is not done against Taiwan as much as it is against many other developing countries. For example, China will only establish diplomatic ties with countries that break off ties with Taiwan. The enticement, is for the Taiwan businesses that have spent tens of billions investing in factories in China. Ever hear of Foxconn? Well, I doubt they could possibly have a one million strong workforce apart from China. So, more and more, Taiwan depends on China's economy. Its that simple. And many of Taiwan's wealthiest executives have 2nd homes on the Mainland. And 2nd families ...but that's another topc ;)
BTW, I'm married to one of those people. Born and raised on Taiwan - But if you ask her, she's ShanDong...from ShanDong province where her Father came from.
So what you are telling me, there is no correlation between those who trace their heritage back to the Mainland and those who want re-unificaton? I find that hard to believe.
As time goes on, persons such are more and more in the minority here on Taiwan. Taiwanese national identity is growing stronger each day. In spite of the PRC/CCP apologists.
What percentage, would you say, want re-unification vs Taiwan independence?
They want/need to have a central power to tell them what they can and cannot do and to help them when they need it.
Jackie Chan said something similar. And he was lamblasted by the Chinese public. For someone who is so indignant about any suggestion that Taiwan is part of China, you make some broad generalizations about the Chinese people.
Two questions, if anyone knows the answer:
How much does one of the new PRC aircraft carriers cost to build?
And how many more will we be FUNDING each month, with our massive trade deficit?
I’m guessing offhand they’re less expensive than ours. Already our trade deficit would literally pay for FOUR NEW CHINESE CARRIERS EVERY MONTH.
That would be at the cost of our versions.
Wake up people.
Plate ‘em over, seal ‘em up and plumb them for JP5 storage. Or water storage, or honey tanks...
It’s not rocket surgery to modify a silo for other uses. To think others aren’t smart enough to think of similar alternate uses is rather silly, to put it mildly.
not as much as you probably think. the big intellifence mistake with pearl harbor was makinhg decisions based on intentions not capability. we successfully attacked pearl harbor by carriers twice so we knew it could be done but we thought the japanese would confine their targets to the phillipines. of course there are other gactors such as shallow water (ignoring lessons from taranto), lack of extended air recon due to lack of planes, pilots, and supplies. in reality given war plan orange, pearl harbor was probably the best thing to happen short of no war at all
“1. It is going to cost them a ton of money that they could use for something much more dangerous
2. They don’t know how to support and maintain these ships
3. They don’t know how to defend them
4. They don’t have the training to run them
5. They don’t know how to use them”
additionally theu don’t do underway replenishment which is why they are “helping” build ports arouns westpac and the indian ocean much like british coaling stations post american civil war. also everywhere they go they are in range of land-based aircraft and shore-launched SSMs so they better have a good escort fleet w/ strong AAW and ASW.
well....after all, (the) SHRILLary runs the DoS and she doesn't...
want the tech-transfers to Bubba made public during her (new) W.H. run...
no...Obahbah doesn't run anything, his (social) misfits run
the country....hmmm, he just "runs" his mouth / golf carts.
Go on a stroll thru Taipei. You see that every intersection has a concrete machine gun emplacement, or four, covering every street.
Every bridge has pill boxes guarding the approaches. Do you think that every bridge support has built in holes for explosives to drop the bridge in minutes?
Large fields of fire surround every government building,
There are tank obstacles in all the river beds, and the river banks are 20 foot high vertical concrete walls, with tunnels feeding into the channel. (Even if the water is only 6 inches deep. All of them can double as anti-tank obstacles.)
Do you suppose that in the mountains that you can see to the south, there are buried artillery emplacements with every square inch of the city registered?
(Warning- The purple sauce on what you thought was chop suey is squid ink...)
The Communist government has been threatening for 60 years to invade and restore the "Taiwan Province," to PRC control. No matter which whinging pantywaist idiot is in our White House. Do you suppose there is a reason they've waited? Or, are they just nice guys?
And all their sailors have their hair in pigtails.
they plan to use it to intimidate the Philippines and VietNam to give up the Spratlys islands so they can grab all that oil and natural gas.
they are making threats against the Philippines and Vietnam, with their smaller Navy ships harassing our fishermen in the Spratlys islands near our coast.
I take it back, you are not a commie lover. No you are just a commie.
You have an odd way of expressing yourself, that often does not sit well with American conservatives.
Remember, if you express sympathy for the struggles of ordinary Chinese to overcome the shackles of their oppressive central government and achieve a more prosperous future -- then we agree entirely.
But if you express sympathy for the totalitarian Chi-Com government's efforts to more thoroughly control its people, or expand its power to Taiwan or any other foreign territory, then you will get blasted here -- and rightly so.
So I noted this quote:
ponder life from post #133: "If China was a developed nation (which she likely will achieve in about 30 years), a commensurate number of carriers with Britain would be 44 (forty four) Queen Elizabeth class carriers.
China, of course, doesn't need that many to defend herself.
But I feel China has a right to build, say 8-10."
"a right"? What does that mean, "a right"?
As a sovereign state, China has "a right" to build thousands of aircraft carriers, if that's what it wants.
The proper question is: when do those carriers, and the programs to build them, become threats to China's neighbors, and what is the necessary response to such threats?
So, ponder life, for you to insist on a "right" for China to build 8 to 10 carriers (why not 80 to 100?), is to suggest something deeply wrong with your way of thinking.
In what sense does China need any carriers?
Is China today seriously threatened by some powerful new military force?
Has some other nation asked China to protect them? If so, from whom?
Obviously, the answers are "no and no."
So China's new carriers are simply exercises in self-glorification and intimidation of her neighbors, who can only respond by building more carriers of their own.
And who benefits from all these new carriers?
Certainly not the Chinese people who, like Americans, should be fully focused on reducing the size, cost and authority of their bloated and oppressive central government.
That is the second time you have broken the terms of use for Freerepublic regarding personal attacks.
Hope it gets your account banned.
In the future, where, for some unknown reason like you are made Sec Def, the PLAN has 10 real aircraft carriers and we have none, drone or otherwise, is acceptable to you? Yes or no.
So you are going to let a sci-fi show dictate national policy .... did you ever see the one about the cars coming to life?.......
***Chinas carrier is a very nice target...
Again, seems our candidness, our genuineness, our integrity, hence [indirectly] our honor too are being called into question here: I mean with today’s “sure-kill” French “Exocet missiles”, don’t you agree that same can be said for all surface vessels large and small and however crude or however cutting edge? Simply put: Carriers are a two way street and so are some modern day French Exocet ballistic missiles.
Them ChiComs are not dumb. Already, as far fetched as it may seem, words on the street is that the next group of Chinese CV’s to come out will be stock with what’s deemed as naval 5th. generation cutting edge aircrafts so jump on them again guys. Our pride, our ego, and our self-consciousness are dependent on our ability for our own words of self-comfort.
When will we come to terms with the idea that our world goes round and round and that the sun shines on both sides of the hemisphere and so does the wind-shifts of course.
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.