Replies

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?

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.