Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Chinese gov't has a plan to match & beat the west at it's own game - through technology and less reliance on weight of numbers of foot soldiers. Their rocket and space program and new J-20 stealth jet are moves in that direction. They may have bumps in the road but have a goal.
I am not concerned about Communism - most Chinese are more merchant/capitalist oriented. The fight will be over scarce resources. While the west believes in environmentalism & conserving & managing resources - the Chinese believe in grabbing all they can before it's all gone - hence the rape of Africa's resources: Special Report: China Storms Africa | Fast Company
While America is preoccupied with the war in Iraq , and while think-tank economists continue to spit out papers debating whether vital resources are running out at all, China's leadership isn't taking any chances. In just a few years, the People's Republic of China (PRC) has become the most aggressive investor-nation in Africa. This commercial invasion is without question the most important development in the sub-Sahara since the end of the Cold War -- an epic, almost primal propulsion that is redrawing the global economic map. One former U.S. assistant secretary of state has called it a "tsunami." Some are even calling the region "ChinAfrica."
I was just reading about how China is building an aircraft carrier fleet to rival the USA. I'd like to hear from our military/weapons experts and former carrier vets here like PITTSTONTOSARASOTA and Ashville Native etc. about what they think.
The Chinese gov't has a plan to match & beat the west at it's own game - through technology and less reliance on weight of numbers of foot soldiers. Their rocket and space program and new J-20 stealth jet are moves in that direction. They may have bumps in the road but have a goal.
I am not concerned about Communism - most Chinese are more merchant/capitalist oriented. The fight will be over scarce resources. While the west believes in environmentalism & conserving & managing resources - the Chinese believe in grabbing all they can before it's all gone - hence the rape of Africa's resources: Special Report: China Storms Africa | Fast Company
While America is preoccupied with the war in Iraq , and while think-tank economists continue to spit out papers debating whether vital resources are running out at all, China's leadership isn't taking any chances. In just a few years, the People's Republic of China (PRC) has become the most aggressive investor-nation in Africa. This commercial invasion is without question the most important development in the sub-Sahara since the end of the Cold War -- an epic, almost primal propulsion that is redrawing the global economic map. One former U.S. assistant secretary of state has called it a "tsunami." Some are even calling the region "ChinAfrica."
...those resources are China's achilles tendon though. Without the ability to project their power beyond their immediate border regions, the Chinese have no ability to guarantee their access to these resources. They are still a LONG way away from being able to project their power which requires more than a stealth fighter, light carrier and a couple satellites. It's the United States ability to move vast quantities of firepower across the globe at will that makes us a superpower. Like I said before, if an embargo or war happened, we'd run out of crap at Wal*Mart the Chinese would be starving in the streets and shivering in the cold and dark.
The Chinese gov't has a plan to match & beat the west at it's own game - through technology and less reliance on weight of numbers of foot soldiers. Their rocket and space program and new J-20 stealth jet are moves in that direction. They may have bumps in the road but have a goal.
Gotta laugh at that.... The Chinese who have to steal or copy technology will beat the west? The J-20 is the perfect example of stolen/copied technology. Compare the YF-22 (designed in 1986, first flown in 1990) to the J-20...
Hmmmmmm Looks are deceiving, the Chinese don't have the engine technology or expertise, don't have the stealth composite technology or manufacturing expertise but damn! They make good looking knock-offs. By the time they have an operational J-20 the west will have moved on to UAF's (Unmanned Aerial Fighters).
I noticed the same thing as plwhite, this article is all fluff and doesn't make sense. They don't have a carrier but are planning on having a carrier by 2015, therefore they will have a huge carrier fleet by 2020 that along with their "27 destroyers" will challenge the U.S. for supremacy of the seas?
What does the U.S. have over 60 Burke destroyers, over 20 Tico cruisers, at least 10 carriers depending on what they do with Ford class? Come on.
Sorry, don't buy what the article says...
A huge carrier fleet in 9 years? I guess they could have a huge carrier fleet if they continue buying and refurbishing other countries worn out flattops...
The carrier to be completed by 2014/15 will be half the size of our current carriers and conventionally powered.. Their first nuclear carrier will not be built until 2020....
What is to be concerned over? The Chinese build things with technology that's either stolen or copied from other countries so will always be behind in the weapons race. (ok, ok so they invented gunpowder, that was how long ago?)
The Chinese can build numerous ships but the technology and expertise on and in those ships will remain inferior for a few more decades...
It doesn't matter whether a carrier is nuclear powered or conventional when it comes down the nitty gritty; which is long-range striking capabilities. A conventional-powered carrier can still traverse the World's oceans, mind you, and still has the ability to come within range of its aircrafts abilities, let alone being able to fire long-range missiles-which is why cruisers, destroyers, and subs have dominated the naval forces of the World.
Technologically speaking, a weapon is a weapon. Who gives a rats behind if the technology was stolen, borrowed, copied, or developed by their own ingenuity and engineers. Whether the Chinese developed their own ICBMs or stole the "technology" from the US or Russia is completely moot. Where-ever they got it from, it can still seriously ruin your day.
You also got to keep in mind that aircraft can be anything. Hot-air balloons and blimps are considered to be aircraft. If such aircraft can be equipped with weapon-systems that can do some serious damage, does it matter how technologically advanced they are if they still have the ability to cause some serious damage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
I am both amused and pleased that they have fallen into the same "Big Ship Navy" trap that has wasted so much of our wealth with no discernable return unless you count retaining our ability to build very large ships at uncompetitive prices.
Prior to WWII, a countries might and pride was based almost solely on its naval capabilities. That was also before ICBMs an long-range/jet aircraft.
There has been some effort be some countries to rebuild/build a strong naval force, but so far the US is the only one that still dominates this department.
It doesn't matter whether a carrier is nuclear powered or conventional when it comes down the nitty gritty; which is long-range striking capabilities.
Oh really? In your navy what does a conventional carrier use for fuel? Sink the oilers and the carrier is dead in the water.....
Quote:
let alone being able to fire long-range missiles-which is why cruisers, destroyers, and subs have dominated the naval forces of the World
Tell that to Saddam
As I said in a previous post when you rely on stolen technology you will always be a step behind.
Quote:
If such aircraft can be equipped with weapon-systems that can do some serious damage, does it matter how technologically advanced they are if they still have the ability to cause some serious damage?
Lotsa words but makes no sense..... weapons systems can do serious damage.... no really? I thought they did comical damage.
Quote:
There has been some effort be some countries to rebuild/build a strong naval force, but so far the US is the only one that still dominates this department.
Are you telling us something new? America has dominated the waves since the late 40's..... As the PLA has stated, they expect parity with America by 2050....
And by 2050 space will be where the weapons are located.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I thought they did comical damage.
