Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Communist China will Try to Copy Giant Soviet Aircraft Carrier in Attempt to Expand its Naval Power
The London Times | March 5, 2002 | Oliver August

Posted on 03/05/2002 8:40:46 AM PST by rightwing2

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last
To: sonofliberty2
So....still in the hall?
61 posted on 03/05/2002 12:00:55 PM PST by Sid Rich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

Comment #62 Removed by Moderator

Comment #63 Removed by Moderator

To: sonofliberty2
So, 60,000 is equal to 97,000 tons? Is that New Math you are using there? In addition, one must consider the aircraft, software, hardware, operational doctrine and people that man a ship. Do you really think that China will trump the US Navy in those categories?

Given that China does not practice free trade, how does free trade help it? China has opened its markets to FOREIGN trade, not FREE trade. Moreover, I cannot help but imagine that China had shipyards before Nixon's visit. If the US never traded one single thing with China ever, they would still have an aircraft carrier. England, France and India all have one. It ain't that big of a deal, especially as littoral warfare will be the key to a naval war with China.

Japan, as an island nation, always had a long naval tradition. What you are referring to is the introduction of British advisors during the Meiji Restoration. Between 1875-1905, Japan built a fleet that beat Russia, a third rate naval power, at the Tsushima Straits. The US Navy is not a third rate naval power, and China is not an island nation with a warrior class, training from the world's top navy, and a long history of seafaring.

The US GDP has grown mightily since Reagan was president. In that case, might I ask where your evidence of US economic decline may be found? I assume, that you mean the manufacturing sector, as most Luddites do. In that case, manufacturing, as a percent of GDP, has declined only slightly. Let's take a peek at the last fifteen years, as trade with China took off. In 1988, US manufacturing totalled a $888.6B contribution to GDP. By 2000, that number had risen to $1566.6B. Not too bad, eh? The big drop is in manufacturing employment, not output. In that case, I would submit to you that economic development has also caused thousands of blacksmiths and carriage makers to lose their jobs, as well. Should we bring back the horse and buggy to save those manufacturing jobs?

I tried looking up "Cobet" on Google. Most of what came back was for a German university professor. Did you mean "Colbert", the French physiocrat? Or, is there a first name that would help me in my search?

BTW, what does it matter that Ricardo was Jewish? I'd be glad to explain to you the math behind Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage. Can you tell me why he is wrong? Moreover, since when is the freedom to trade with whomever one wishes a left-wing idea? Last I checked, personal economic freedom was a conservative thing.

Last, but not least, I cannot recall from all of my days in Constitutional law class where there is a reference to fair trade and a rejection of free trade. Could you enlighten me?

64 posted on 03/05/2002 12:35:54 PM PST by Seydlitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
Building carriers is one thing. Operating them is another. And operating them effectively is yet another.

My guess is if they get them built, they won't have the money to operate them. China's economy is in deep do-do, with 20% unemployment, which is expected to increase by 30% a year for the next decade at least. Moreover to keep their membership in the WTO they are going to have to do some serious reforms, which will hit the old state owned businesses really hard. That will exacerbate the problem.

Finally if the get them built, and they can afford to run them, they have no experience in actually running and maintaining them. I expect they would be about as effective against the US Navy as the Argentine aircraft carrier was against the Brits in '82.

How do you say "big expensive slow-moving target" in Chinese?

65 posted on 03/05/2002 12:51:54 PM PST by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hugin
Look for that big rascal to be docking in Taiwan pretty soon.
66 posted on 03/05/2002 1:15:50 PM PST by mikhailovich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
Thanks for the heads up!
67 posted on 03/05/2002 1:15:53 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sonofliberty2
"The wealth of America was comparatively better in the 1940s than it is now. So then yes."

Perhaps you remember it that way, but non-subjectively America was poorer in virtually every way.

Lower GNP, lower GNP per capita, lower real income per capita adjusted for inflation, lower per capita productivity.

During the 1940's only 70 to 80 percent of homes had running water, indoor toilets and electric lights. Whither you think so or not we are doing much better these days:)

source: The State of Humanity by Julian L. Simon 1995.

68 posted on 03/05/2002 1:56:52 PM PST by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

Comment #69 Removed by Moderator

Comment #70 Removed by Moderator

Comment #71 Removed by Moderator

To: thepainster
Would they build thier carries from scratch, or just finish building out the Russian ships?

Most likely they would build their carriers from scratch and use the Varyag and the 3 Kiev class carriers they have acquired as training carriers. However, it is not inconceivable that they could reactivate 1 or 2 of the Kievs. The Varyag which is only 70% finished would be more difficult to complete and recommission.
72 posted on 03/05/2002 7:07:24 PM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Where the heck do you get all these great pics?
73 posted on 03/05/2002 7:08:40 PM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah, sonofliberty2
By 2015, China will be engaged in a new round of warlordism and barbarism, and they won't care about contesting power in the western Pacific--they will be far too busy trying to contest power in the streets of Beijing and Shanghai...

This is a very idealistic and naive assumption. Dream on! The ChiCom government is growing stronger and more entrenched in power every day thanks to US trade and appeasement policies providing them with $100 billion a year to increase their police state apparatus and build up their military. Who exactly, do you think the PLA will be fighting in the streets? The people you say? What do you think will be the outcome of such a fight? Think of Tianamenn a hundred times over, a thousand, ney ten thousand times over (100 million civilian dead) because that is the number of dead Chinaman the Butchers of Beijing are willing to sacrifice in order to maintain Communism's hold on power.

You fail to comprehend the Asian mind. The ChiComs place far less value on human life than we do. They already have killed a minimum of 60 million of their people in the past five decades (not counting the 66 million-odd forced abortions and infanticides they commit each and every year using 1986 figures). They kill hundreds of thousands of political and religious dissidents every year in the laogai death camps which hold between 7 and 20 million prisoners. What makes you think that they will hesitate to kill a few million more in the streets of Beijing. Indeed, they may view it in a positive light as a means of helping them with their population control program.
74 posted on 03/05/2002 7:22:36 PM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Hugin, sonofliberty2, rebelbase, sawdring, scholastic, OKCSubmariner
My guess is if they get them built, they won't have the money to operate them. China's economy is in deep do-do, with 20% unemployment, which is expected to increase by 30% a year for the next decade at least.

I guess if you call 6-9% annual growth rates "deep do-do", then they must really be hurting.

Finally if the get them built, and they can afford to run them, they have no experience in actually running and maintaining them. I expect they would be about as effective against the US Navy as the Argentine aircraft carrier was against the Brits in '82.

The Argentines didn't have an aircraft carrier in 1982. They did have a ship known as the General Belgrano which was an old US light cruiser which was dispatched in rapid fashion by a British sub. Sure the ChiComs will have a learning curb. Sure their carriers will be smaller and less effective than ours are, but they can afford to build them at less than one-eighth the cost--about $600 million a pop--thanks to their cheap labor among other things. in addition, they will be operating with the advantage of interior lines near their naval bases with the assistance of land based naval bombers, supersonic anti-ship missiles like the ultracapable SS-N-26 Yakhont against which the US Navy currently has no defense, some of which may be armed with EMP warheads, and strategic SAMs like S-300.

Their massive theater nuclear superiority over the US in Asia will help them as well--about ChiCom 2300 nukes against whatever SLBMs the US has in the area which after the Bush unilateral nuclear disarmament of our strategic nuclear deterrent will likely be damned few--if things get dicey. A couple of well placed 200KT armed Sunburns will sink all 3 US Seventh Fleet flattops with their escorts. I don't see the US nuking Beijing over such a loss. We would have nothing but SLBMs with which to respond in kind thanks to the unilateral nuclear disarmament measures of Bush Sr. which mandated withdrawal of all US nukes from Asia and from US navy ships worldwide.
75 posted on 03/05/2002 7:41:08 PM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
This is a very idealistic and naive assumption.

It's based on Chinese history.

Dream on! The ChiCom government is growing stronger and more entrenched in power every day thanks to US trade and appeasement policies providing them with $100 billion a year to increase their police state apparatus and build up their military.

Uh-huh. And that means that the various elites will have lots of troops to rent service from.

Who exactly, do you think the PLA will be fighting in the streets?

Other PLA troops.

The people you say?

No, and I never did, either.

What do you think will be the outcome of such a fight?

Of the fight I'm projecting? An interesting correlation of forces here. In one corner, the noveau riche of Shanghai will have a technology edge; the Chinese agrarian elites have dang near bottomless pools of manpower; and the Manchurian industrial fat-cats have factories of varying capability and unknown provenance. The wild card: which way will the Second Artillery Corps jump?

Think of Tianamenn a hundred times over, a thousand, ney ten thousand times over (100 million civilian dead) because that is the number of dead Chinaman the Butchers of Beijing are willing to sacrifice in order to maintain Communism's hold on power.

It will be the elites of Shanghai versus the elites of Beijing (who basically hail from the Agrarian China) versus the elites of the Manchurian industrial regions. And they will have army units to command--because they will BUY their services (corruption is becoming a way of life in the PLA). Think Stalingrad a thousand times over.

You fail to comprehend the Asian mind.

Your ascribing one monolithic mindset to all of Asia shows that you don't come even close to understanding any "Asian mind" except the picture you paint for yourself.

The ChiComs place far less value on human life than we do.

That tends to make a civil war far more likely instead of less likely when the wheels come off--think of how the civil war in Yugoslavia got started, with Communist elites deciding to exploit ethnic differences to maintain their grip on power (there are significant ethnic differences between the major groups in China--and those ethnic faultlines dovetail nicely with the economic ones).

They already have killed a minimum of 60 million of their people in the past five decades (not counting the 66 million-odd forced abortions and infanticides they commit each and every year using 1986 figures).

In short, the various Chinese elites suffer from mass psychosis. Again, this does not make compromise and consensus very likely.

They kill hundreds of thousands of political and religious dissidents every year in the laogai death camps which hold between 7 and 20 million prisoners.

And how will this bloody-mindedness towards those who disagree prevent a civil war when the elites have enough differences for a falling out?

What makes you think that they will hesitate to kill a few million more in the streets of Beijing.

Nothing. That's why there will be a civil war, DUH!

76 posted on 03/05/2002 9:13:39 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
I guess if you call 6-9% annual growth rates "deep do-do", then they must really be hurting.

Let me guess: your IRA was in such gems as Global Crossing and Enron because you were gullible enough to believe their prospectuses. China is simply Enron writ large.

The Argentines didn't have an aircraft carrier in 1982.

Bzzt. Wrong answer.

They did have a ship known as the General Belgrano which was an old US light cruiser which was dispatched in rapid fashion by a British sub.

Word is that the person MOST annoyed by the sinking of the General Belgrano was the skipper of the British sub stalking the 25 de Mayo--the Argentine aircraft carrier that didn't exist. The Argentine Navy made a U-turn and headed right on home. Watch--after the first "flaming datum," the ChiCom navy will head home--because although the crews are cheap, the ships are expensive.

77 posted on 03/05/2002 9:23:54 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
New Thread today: China's Defense Budget to Rise by 17.6 Percent: Minister

China will increase its defense expenditures for national defense by 25.2 billion yuan this year, an increase of 17.6 percent from last year, Finance Minister Xiang Huaicheng said Wednesday.........

78 posted on 03/06/2002 6:25:00 AM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: sonofliberty2
Dude think about what your saying, a carrier group consists of a lot more than the carrier it self, you need supply ships, missle destroyers, and subs, not to mention the actual aircrafts. The chinese may have the physical capacity to build for carrier hulls per year, but can't equip all 4 with the other 18 support crafts and 100 fighter jets per year, its impossible given their industrial base, besides the most exaggerated PRC budget is about 60 billion, on carrier group costs over 30Billion to build, you are saying that they will give 50% of their entire annual budget to the navel, the army and airforce would go insane.
79 posted on 03/07/2002 2:41:09 PM PST by borghead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
The only country in the world currently adding capacity to printed circuit board manufacturing facilities is the PRC. Most of the Taiwanese PCB companies (typically run by suicidal KMT industrialists who yearn for their familial homelands) have moved their manufacturing facilities to the mainland. Even a number of Western firms have done this - Viasystems shut down what was then the largest PCB plant in the world, just outside of Richmond, VA, and turned around and opened two new plants in the PRC. This is but a single example in a single industry.

Folks, unless you've been to the PRC and seen the growth and the absolutely massive upsurge in both high tech and low tech businesses (all of which can produce war fighting gear if commandeered to do so), then I would urge against writing off the PRC as a formidible future enemy.

Couple all of that with their increasingly tight military cooperation with Russia, and the potential for the Russian nuclear forces to be coordinated with the PLA capabilities to form the core of a Trans-Asian Axis, and you have the makings of something that has not been seen since the 1940s. And, unlike the disparate powers who only became an axis after the start of war back then, here we have, with core players the PRC and Russia, along with their various (in many cases commmon) "clients", what we see to be indeed The Trans-Asian Axis.

Why are so many Americans so hesitant to confront this? Do we always have to wait until we are literally hit over the head with geopolitical reality for our typically isolationist and doubt benefitting naivete to be shattered? What would it take for us to adopt a more proactive approach to preparing for the inevitable next great powers conflict? Just some food for thought...

80 posted on 03/07/2002 7:24:33 PM PST by GOP_1900AD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson