Posted on 04/24/2010 5:17:37 PM PDT by neverdem
YALONG BAY, China — The Chinese military is seeking to project naval power well beyond the Chinese coast, from the oil ports of the Middle East to the shipping lanes of the Pacific, where the United States Navy has long reigned as the dominant force, military officials and analysts say.
China calls the new strategy “far sea defense,” and the speed with which it is building long-range capabilities has surprised foreign military officials...
--snip--
A 2009 Pentagon report estimated Chinese naval forces at 260 vessels, including 75 “principal combatants” — major warships — and more than 60 submarines. The report noted the building of an aircraft carrier, and said China “continues to show interest” in acquiring carrier-borne jet fighters from Russia. The United States Navy has 286 battle-force ships and 3,700 naval aircraft, though ship for ship the American Navy is considered qualitatively superior to the Chinese Navy.
--snip--
Countries in the region have responded with their own acquisitions, said Carlyle A. Thayer, a professor at the Australian Defense Force Academy. In December, Vietnam signed an arms deal with Russia that included six Kilo-class submarines, which would give Vietnam the most formidable submarine fleet in Southeast Asia. Last year, Malaysia took delivery of its first submarine, one of two ordered from France, and Singapore began operating one of two Archer-class submarines bought from Sweden.
Last fall, during a speech in Washington, Lee Kuan Yew, the former Singaporean leader, reflected widespread anxieties when he noted China’s naval rise and urged the United States to maintain its regional presence. “U.S. core interest requires that it remains the superior power on the Pacific,” he said. “To give up this position would diminish America’s role throughout the world.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The Chinese have been annually increasing the amount of money they spend on their military for quite a number of years. Should they still be surprised?
Either they live in a bubble or they have their heads buried in the sand.
People generally don't get it, that with the exception of a very few Presidents like Richard Nixon and Dwight Eisenhower, most 20th century Republicans, whether they supported free trade or tariffs, have all been "wooden gun" budget-cutters.
Their Fifth Avenue constituents want their tax cuts, and no backtalk or excuses! And if the rest of us pony up and kick in more for the kind of defense establishment we need in a genocidal world, why, they want that "refunded" to them, too!!
Both Poppy Bush and Dubya came into office slashing the DoD budget: Poppy slated all those heavy Army divisions and all the BB's and many of the CVA's for retirement as soon as he was elected in 1988. He was brought up short by Saddam who, if he'd played his cards a little cooler and waited another two years before busting a move, would be master of the Persian Gulf today.
Dubya came to office as a double-dipped budget cutter; his first six months in office, his favorite buzz-word was "carve-out". He told Rumsfeld to stand fast on the DoD's budget requests and NOT to put in requests that would redeem Dubya's campaign pledges. But 9/11 changed that -- mostly. Two years later, he was still doing "carve-outs" from NASA's budget, even two months after the Columbia accident proved that Slick had skeletonized the safety functions in NASA beyond the danger point.
The mistake the analysts are making is not in underestimating how much the PLN is spending, but underestimating their ingenuity and adaptability in transposing all that cash into military might.
Or they can go to Jeff Head’s website for more info. Maybe the intel agencies aren’t give the analysts all the needed information in order to make a proper analysis. It’s also possible no one wants to stand up and tell it like it is for fear of losing their career.
Hate to be this brief concerning a post like that, but when I agree there really isn’t much to say. And I agree with you.
About all I can say, is it’s really sad to see Conservatives excuse their own, considering they would be livid if a person on the left were doing the same thing.
That’s my biggest concern going into 2012. Some of my fellow patriots have developed an infatuation that knows no bounds.
I pretty much agree with you. It’s a sad and angering reality too.
Poppy for the most part and then Slick cost us a Kitty Hawk class carrier right at it's half life. The post 9/11 carrier fiasco wasn't the first. The first happened in 1993. The AMERICA in mid 1993 was basically not battle ready nor in operational condition. This excerpt from a US News and World Report article found in the Congressional Record explains why.
The America needs constant attention. Commissioned in 1965, it is showing its age. A month before leaving Norfolk, a senior enlisted crew member complained to his congressman: The ship was operating on only two of its six electric generators, without radar and unable to pump fuel. This would be its third six-month cruise in three years, and without the standard 18 months at home for repairs, salt water and full steaming had taken their toll.
Entire article can be found here.
I found out from a shipmate who was on board during that time frame the account was true. It was The Senior Enlisted man on board wrote congress. That is not to be taken lightly as Master Chiefs don't do such things for nothing. Two generators meant no air conditioners and that is my knowledgeable on this matter assessment. Starting even one of ten chillers took about 1200 amps to start and 175-300 to run and that's at 460 volts. I worked on those units in my duty on board. No A/C means no electronics is operable including radar. The fuel issues I am not certain on but that could limit how many of her eight boilers could be used.
America returned from a third six month deployment without the REQUIRED routine shipyard stand down for repairs and maintenance. Upon arrival back from her third deployment in Norfolk in March 1994 she had an explosion in one of the boiler rooms. She had to be towed Cold Iron into Portsmouth to NNSY for repairs. They did a band-aid repair for a final deployment and she was decommissioned in 1996 at her half service life mark. AMERICA in service age was just behind the KENNEDY. Those two were the two newest conventionals.
When the KENNEDY and KITTY HAWK readiness fiasco's happened following 9/11 me and my uncle were discussing it. He was a retired Navy and Gator Freighter Captain was his last duty. Gator Freighters are Amphibious Carriers for troops, tanks, etc. He said "How can a ship fail INSURV? The Navy won't let you fail INSURV" In his time and in mine that was true. I was active during Carter's tenure and not even the Carter years took us to that low. Oh we had problems but the repairs got done.
The BUSH's have the distinguishment of likely being the only presidents to cut funding and readiness for the military in a time of war. The GOP loyalist still give them and the GOP congressional two house majority 1994-2006 a pass.
Let's just hope and pray our nuclear fleet is in fact getting what it needs.
Mine too and such recklessness is coming at the expense of our nations very survival now.
As you know, I agree with you on Poppy and GW but Clinton did far more damage and the Navy was way too complaint on reducing maintenance to get its’ R&D money for their failed DDG and CG 1000 programs.
We're almost to the point we have all our eggs in a few single easy to hit baskets. Pearl Harbor runs through my mind especially after some pictures I've seen of 5 carriers berthed same time at the same base. A trip upstream and a trip across the river and more than have the carrier fleet gone just like that as well as two of three carrier yard left that can do extensive repairs.
China is almost in a position now to out produce us with our own technology. They don't have to build super carriers when they can build subs then just sit and wait on a target. Even an older Diesel Powered sub is bad news. The Navy in it's insane wisdom parked the S-3 Vikings also. F-14 cancellation was another bad move. We had the best mouse trap and it owned the skies. Downgrading our defense technology is insane. Downgrading has been policy for 20 years now.
Once again, I agree.
I concur with that, and I think the root of the problem is a bunch of pissy little blue-haired widows walking their teacup poodles in Central Park and complaining about prices in Bergdorf. They want their taxes cut and their coupons raised, and if that means a 100-ship Navy, then we'll just have to manage </off primly huffy>. Guess they have no idea, like some other American women do, what it's like to get occupied and raped by a foreign army.
I agree -- and Pearl is waaaaay too exposed, as Adm. Nagumo pointed out for us in 1941. In fact, Navy exercises in the early 30's proved the same point (Japanese officers observing the exercises, of course), but FDR had other ideas -- namely, about baiting the Japanese tiger. The Establishment has never admitted he did that. In fact, that would make an excellent litmus test someday, for who'll be allowed to vote and hold office in a reconstituted America.
Yards like that need to be upstream of Suisun Bay, hell, up the Russian River somewhere where they can't be reached without overflying powerful defenses ..... and in Atlantic basin, they ought to be in the Mississippi River or Galveston Bay, somewhere in the protected waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Even Chesapeake Bay, when you think about it, is exposed -- first hostile act by the Germans was to lay 24 acoustic mines in the shipping channels there. U-boot came up into the bay by dead of night, slick in, slick out. Not good.
Yeah, giving Dubya that famous ride out to the Lincoln was the S-3's swan song, wasn't it?
It was "Big Dick" Cheney who made the call on the F-14, during Poppy's watch. Great move, Dick!
Yeah but it’s only so long that we can maintain our current military strength. A good example was the Spanish Armada and we all know what happened. :-P
I'm thinking of one port east coast USA in the Pearl Harbor sense. Add to that an interstate in plain sight of the carrier piers and the interstate by-pass in sight of one of two Naval shipyards.
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.