I wonder if we get invitations to return to Subic Bay in the Philippines and Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam?
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 ...
I wonder if we get invitations to return to Subic Bay in the Philippines and Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam?
The Obama Doctrine...Retreat at all costs.
“China calls the new strategy “far sea defense,” and the speed with which it is building long-range capabilities has surprised foreign military officials...”
FReepers aren’t surprised but foreign military officials are. Why is that?
China would like to squeeze Vietnam back into the fold. They are becoming friendly with the States and they are taking a lot of business away from China. Subic will happen after we get rid of Bambi!
Venezuela and Panama coming soon!
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
So how’s that “free trade” thing working out?
US trade deficit with the Peoples Republic of China, per MONTH:
20 billion.
That’s enough to pay for four Reagan-class Aircraft Carriers.
Every month.
Considering Vietnam just bought a bunch of submarines, they’re not going back into any “fold” with China. They’ve hated each other for 1,500+ years.
Thanks to Jeff Head for much of that. Jeff, I hope you’re doing well out there.
Well, I gladly welcome my Asian conquerors! Here they are in full military uniform:
*http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2007/11/14/mummy-jet-li.jpg
*http://www.russellwongfan.com/rwpic/mummy3_01_m.jpg
And the Indians are doing a good job of building up. As are the Japanese.
No love lost with China for those guys, either.
Policies post Reagan, set up what is taking place now.
Thank God he is gone and won’t have to see our men and women have to die because some public officials got paid off and gifted China with technology and the American dollars to put it to good use.
I am literally furious with the pathetic free trade apologists who got us here.
However, only STUPID people take on the US Navy in blue water. It would be a short, but exciting engagement for them:)
Nobody is stupid enough to engage us in the open when our military power is the only real advantage that we have left as a nation. I think the point is to make the cost of US intervention so high that we would think twice before trying to cut off their Indian ocean supply lines.
This could also serve to goad the US in a costly arms race that would further bankrupt us. The Chinese economy is based on the production of real goods, while our economy is revolving into a series of currency manipulation schemes backed by our global military presence. So while China needs only military deterrence to keep their economy going. We need absolute military dominance to prevent our economy from collapsing.
Of course this is what happens to any empire in decline. Our own Internal corruption and decay is doing most of the work for the Chinese.
Possibly because “foreign military officials” base their projections on the military procurement situation they are used to...
The last 20 years sure have not been good ones for our military. Who's to blame? Four presidents following Reagan who make Carter look competent on readiness as well as Congress. This stopped being a DEM/GOP issue when the GOP majority sat on their hands for six years of Clinton's term. They as well did nothing for our troops. We have been on 1996 End Troop Strength Levels since 1996 give or take just a few several thousand.
A Conservative knows well; that the DEMs are going to sell us out on military issues. But when it was the GOP doing it where was the outrage? Hiding behind some "you're either for us or the terrorist" slogan Bush used to divert attention from the crisis and push his globalization while ignoring our military?
On September 12, 2001 many capable and willing patriotic young men were trying their best to enter the military because our nation was attacked. They were turned away. WHY? There was no excuse none whatsoever.
What makes a wise leader? In 1982 when the recession was in full swing Ronald Wilson Reagan had a fully manned military. I even tried to go back in myself but couldn't get a deal I wanted. Two years earlier? Two years earlier in October 1980 I was offered $15,000 and my next rank. The military at that time was highly undermanned. My ship was on three section duty. Two years under one mans leadership made a huge difference.
What is the GOP's excuse for not even trying? The GOP is as much a disgrace on this issue as the DEM's. I was one who when George Bush picked Rummy as Sec of Defense cringed and said please no not him. Why? Because I remember the mess the Ford GOP made of the military under Sec of Def Rummy's tenure as I had just gone active duty.
One last parting word that Republicans need to hear and understand. The Hollow Carter Military was set in motion by the very same ones two presidents last name of Bush used for advisers and key positions. Carter was undeniably a horrible POTUS but Republicans whether you like it or not the GOP handed him one big mess some of which he did in fact begin too correct. His corrections were too little too late obviously. It was also GOP BEFORE CARTER who put us on the path of state sponsored terrorist acts in the M.E. Ford was the man who signed the EO prohibiting covert assassination of foreign heads of state. That option should never be taken off the table.
It is Constitutional to issue Letters of Marque and Reprisals for enemies. Ford should have never signed that EO. That was when it started to form up. That was as much a part of the fuel as the Shah of Iran.
Please Republicans stop repeating history by making the same policy mistakes and expecting different results. Get your leadership act together. Don't tell me the DEMs stop the progress. Ronald Reagan faced a minority his two terms and took us to the most ready standing military post WW2 and likely in our history as a nation. He was a leader and our last true America Comes First President. The rest have been corporate business brokers selling off oyur future one deal at a time calling it Free Trade. Reagan had a wise saying about that as well.
Isn't that a quote from a former CNO? Admiral Crowe, was it? Who said that in the event of hostilities the career of the Red Navy would be "exciting, colorful, and short."
What bothers me has been noted above: that we tend to say stuff like that from time to time -- one of the last times being right before Sputnik went up, and before that, about 18 months before Pearl Harbor.
Classic quote from the Pearl Harbor era came from Adm. Walter Pye, commander of the Battle Force Pacific, during a conference in his quarters aboard USS California on December 6, 1941. CDR Edwin Layton, CINCPAC intelligence officer, went to visit Pye with latest estimates and misgivings and raised the specter of imminent war (the Japanese were already known to be sailing for Malaya, and Layton couldn't find Adm. Yamamoto's aircraft carriers). Pye's opinion was that the Japanese would never attack US interests, since "we're too powerful". We were all that -- and Pye's flagship was sitting on the bottom less than 24 hours later.
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.
