Is China building a carrier?
BartSimpson @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 3:51 pm
SprCForr SprCForr:
Hmm, I'm thinking about a new thread, exploring a "what if" idea I have about China. Anyone interested in playing?
Absolutely! I'm almost done here for the day but if you put it up make sure to preface the thread subject name with [ L X D ] and then set the rules of the discussion in your first post.
Ought to be fun!
-Mario- @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:40 pm
Non-Rev Non-Rev:
Mario - after considerable Googling, I can't find anything about this.... could you post your link, please?
I found this on Janes.com
I personnaly found this a bit scarry. With the exercise that happened last summer from both china and Taiwan... I little too close to reality for confort.
SprCForr @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:17 pm
More to follow on the "what if". I've asked for some direction from Regina about placing the thread etc.
Slightly off topic, but did any of you see the news clips today about the joint Russian/Chinese military exercises? I'm getting the heebie-jeebies thinking about it!
Scape @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:37 pm
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
Scape Scape:
China is not getting F-18 or anything from the west because of the arms embargo and India will benefit from that with trade with the US but giving India Arms will only make Pakistan more on edge and more likely to side with Iran.
In case you forgot, we sell pakistan planes too.
I am well aware of that fact. That does nothing to alleviate the probability of an Iran/Pakistan alliance with China more than happy to applaud such movements. The point remains that arms sales by the US to India are not countering China but feeding more conflict that strengthens their hand and further isolates American influence in Asia.
US has warned Pakistan of sanctions if it goes ahead with the proposed $4 billion, 2,600-kilometer Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.
Work on Iran pipeline to begin in ‘06: Pak
Iran pipeline backed despite U.S. stand
China, Iran sign oil and gas deal
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
$1:
Europe is openly flaunting the arms ban and will soon do away with it all together and are using compliance as a pawn of negations with the US but as the US becomes more isolated on the world stage the less likely the EU will be faithful to such a ruling when 1.3 billion people is a market too powerful for the EU to resist.
Then it'll be their downfall, because china will only buy 3 maybe 4 vessels from europe before they reverse engineer them and build their own, thats a really tempting offer isn't it, they could make a few million. Even russia is more favorable when dealing with India then with China.
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
$1:
It is important to note that China's blue water navy ambitions will be coming at a broad front in accordance with a larger policy of Unrestricted Warfare. This means China will not initiate any conflict with the US except Taiwan but will be continually goading the US into confrontations on multiple fronts from the string of pearls.
If they initiate a conflict with Taiwan, both the west coast, and all of china will be a smoldering radioactive wasteland in moments. Ignoring nuclear weapons China is nothing more then a paper tiger, any attempt to project its forces will have their fleets sunk as soon as they got far enough away from the Mainland.
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
France, Germany, UK, Australia, Norway, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Singapore, India, and Japan all have navies that could cut through chinas in an engagement between them. 50 Rusting and defunct submarines, and a dozen quasi-modern ships, doesn't change that, all they need to do is to fire a few Harpoons at the Sovremenny Destroyers, and engage in a mop up operation with the rest of the fleet. The EU will beat China to superpower status, and so will india.
Its why China has been very careful to keep its ships within range of their land based fighters.
Its why China has been very careful to keep its ships within range of their land based fighters.
India will not be able to keep up the pace vs China and we will see that become more acute in about 5 years as China continues to grow and India plateaus because it can not support any more growth as it lacks infrastructure and development that China is right now building and investing in. It is this investment, and it is massive as we are looking at multi-trillion dollar investment thanks in part to US treasuries, that will catapult China to the status of a Giant. The EU may get there 1st but China will speak as one voice and that will translate into strength. The 50 rust buckets China has now are not the threat and everyone know it. It is the potential that they are making and investing in now, thanks to a shrinking US dollar, that will be the real peril.
Thematic-Device @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:14 pm
an older article, but still largely true...
http://taiwansecurity.org/IS/IS-012000-Nolt.htm
$1:
The most backward of China's military branches is the most important one for modern warfare: the air force or PLAAF. Numerically, China has the world's second largest air force,<6> but this is only because it maintains a huge inventory of aircraft long considered obsolete elsewhere. In fact, China's warplanes, on average, are more backward than those of any other of the top 60 air forces in the world (including all those with more than 100 combat aircraft). Of China's roughly 4000 combat aircraft, two-thirds are obsolete Soviet models from the late 1940s and early 1950s, mostly MiG-19 variants.<7> The Soviets stopped producing the MiG-19 in the late 1950s, at about the same time China began producing it as the J-6. Chinese production of the J-6 continued into the early 1980s, years after the last MiG-19s retired from Soviet service. Production of the Q-5 ground-attack variant continued throughout the 1980s. The primitive jet engines of the J-6/Q-5 have never been upgraded and are quite inefficient by modern standards. Whereas most modern fighters can fly at least twice the speed of sound, these aircraft are barely supersonic. Their usefulness is further limited by their short range and small weapons payload. Worst of all, many lack radar, which is standard equipment for any modern fighter. Aircraft without radar cannot fight at night, in poor visibility, or at long range. They are vulnerable to unseen long-range attack from the radar-guided missiles of nearly any modern fighter. Those with radar have a weak and primitive set that is shorter range than those in use elsewhere. The Il-28 (Chinese: H-5) was the first Soviet jet bomber, developed fifty years ago, yet it still constitutes almost two-thirds of the Chinese bomber force. These thousands of obsolete aircraft would be worthless deathtraps in any campaign against Taiwan's very modern air force.
$1:
Even aircraft quality of the best third of PLAAF is no better than any other of the world's top 60 air forces and inferior to every other significant air force in Asia, except the North Korean, which is similar. Pilots in Taiwan, Japan, India, Pakistan and South Korea are also better trained than those in China, averaging more than twice as many flight hours per year. Nearly all of this top third of the PLAAF comprises Chinese-made F-7 and F-8 fighters and old Soviet Tu-16 (H-6) bombers, which are all decades behind the latest technology. Almost half of this top third are the earlier versions of the F-7. These are copies of early-model MiG-21s, which formed the mainstay of the Soviet air force during the 1960s, but had retired from Soviet service by the time China began mass-producing them in the 1980s. Although faster than the J-6/Q-5, these early-model J-7s have all of their other important disadvantages, including short range, limited weapons suite, and no radar. The PLAAF has only a few hundred of the radar-equipped J-7-III and J-8, which are comparable to the MiG-21MF and MiG-23: front-line Soviet fighters of the 1970s that still comprise a major part of some Russian-equipped air forces, such as those of India, Syria, Libya and Iraq. China's only really modern aircraft are 50 Su-27s (a.k.a., J-11s) purchased from Russia during the 1990s, plus a handful built so far in China. China also agreed recently to purchase 30 modern Su-30 fighters from Russia at a cost of US$2 billion for delivery in 2002. Su-27/30s, also used by India, are in the same class as the Russian MiG-29, used by India and Malaysia; the French Mirage 2000, used by India and Taiwan; and the standard US fighters, the F-15, F-16, and F-18, used by Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. Japan, India, and Taiwan each have at least five times as many modern, high-performance aircraft as does China. Any one of these three would likely prove superior to China in the event of an air war, because China's large numbers of obsolete aircraft would have little effect. China is no longer mass-producing the J-7 or J-8, using its scarce funds instead to assemble in China about 15 per year of the much superior J-11/Su-27.<8>At that rate, the PLAAF's total combat strength will continue to plummet as thousands of obsolete aircraft wear out during the next decade.
$1:
Submarines are very difficult to operate, especially to operate effectively in combat. US and German navy experience in World War II was that a handful of ace captains working with top-notch submarine crews accounted for the vast majority of all ships sunk by submarines. China has no combat experience with submarines. Its crews spend so little time at sea that even their basic seamanship is questionable, let alone their combat ability.<10> The PLAN's inexperience must seriously impair the capability of most of its submarine force. It is interesting to note that Australia purchased from the Russian navy an operational F-class submarine, larger and more capable than China's R-class, as a museum exhibit open to public inspection in Sydney harbor.
and of course a very astute economic point
$1:
Even though most of China's arms are not particularly sophisticated, they are high-tech relative to most of the civilian products that China's industries have converted to producing. Given China's abundant labor and low average standard of living, China's comparative economic advantage lies in producing low-tech consumer products such as clothing, processed food, household appliances and construction materials. Indeed, industries such as these have flourished. In the more high-tech industries, such as electronics and aerospace, the greatest expansion has occurred not in the autonomous development of new high-tech products, but rather in the assembly of imported components and the manufacture of the simpler components, such as aircraft fuselages. This pattern of development is not likely to stimulate much improvement in military-related technologies.
Fact is, obsolete weapons don't make a military force. Particularly when you haven't trained your forces in how to use them. There force is aging, and so far they haven't been able to afford anything in a sufficient quantity to pose a threat. If they decided to attack Taiwan, they would take enormous casualties, almost nothing in their arsenal can defend them against the air planes and weapons such as the harpoon, that the US has sold taiwan.
Their only real hope would be to send so many of their planes, ships and men that taiwan is slowly worn down.
Thematic-Device @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:49 pm
Scape Scape:
India will not be able to keep up the pace vs China and we will see that become more acute in about 5 years as China continues to grow and India plateaus because it can not support any more growth as it lacks infrastructure and development that China is right now building and investing in. It is this investment, and it is massive as we are looking at multi-trillion dollar investment thanks in part to US treasuries, that will catapult China to the status of a Giant. The EU may get there 1st but China will speak as one voice and that will translate into strength. The 50 rust buckets China has now are not the threat and everyone know it. It is the potential that they are making and investing in now, thanks to a shrinking US dollar, that will be the real peril.
Lets see, almost every company prefers to deal with india, and so does every first world country, india doesn't have as many nasty tendencies in the way that it does business. Furthermore India has large number of english speakers and steady 6.8% growth since 94, and since they have an open society, we can be far more certain that those numbers are actually true. Not to mention they have reduced poverty 10% and are generally on the up and up.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac ... .html#Econ
as for india lacking infrastructure *cough*
$1:
China
Railways:
total: 71,898 km
standard gauge: 71,898 km 1.435-m gauge (18,115 km electrified)
dual gauge: 23,945 km (multiple track not included in total) (2002)
Highways:
total: 1,765,222 km
paved: 395,410 km (with at least 25,130 km of expressways)
unpaved: 1,369,812 km (2002 est.)
Railways:
total: 71,898 km
standard gauge: 71,898 km 1.435-m gauge (18,115 km electrified)
dual gauge: 23,945 km (multiple track not included in total) (2002)
Highways:
total: 1,765,222 km
paved: 395,410 km (with at least 25,130 km of expressways)
unpaved: 1,369,812 km (2002 est.)
$1:
India
Railways:
total: 63,230 km (16,693 km electrified)
broad gauge: 45,718 km 1.676-m gauge
narrow gauge: 14,406 km 1.000-m gauge; 3,106 km 0.762-m gauge and 0.610-m gauge (2004)
Highways:
total: 2,525,989 km
paved: 1,448,655 km
unpaved: 1,077,334 km (1999)
Railways:
total: 63,230 km (16,693 km electrified)
broad gauge: 45,718 km 1.676-m gauge
narrow gauge: 14,406 km 1.000-m gauge; 3,106 km 0.762-m gauge and 0.610-m gauge (2004)
Highways:
total: 2,525,989 km
paved: 1,448,655 km
unpaved: 1,077,334 km (1999)
India has the absolute advantage in roads, and the relative advantage in their rail system, since India is a third smaller with only about 13% less rail
Regina @ Tue Aug 23, 2005 9:18 pm
SprCForr SprCForr:
More to follow on the "what if". I've asked for some direction from Regina about placing the thread etc.
I'd put it in the International-War forum. Since it's hypothetical there really can't be a debate with facts that have happened. Although if you really think you need to take the LXD out for a spin, be my guest. For the posters that have no opinion and only post links, they may have a problem with that.
Scape @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 1:12 am
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
Fact is, obsolete weapons don't make a military force. Particularly when you haven't trained your forces in how to use them. There force is aging, and so far they haven't been able to afford anything in a sufficient quantity to pose a threat. If they decided to attack Taiwan, they would take enormous casualties, almost nothing in their arsenal can defend them against the air planes and weapons such as the harpoon, that the US has sold taiwan.
Their only real hope would be to send so many of their planes, ships and men that taiwan is slowly worn down.
Their only real hope would be to send so many of their planes, ships and men that taiwan is slowly worn down.
Clearly your opinion is that China is static and will fight a war now with the antiques that it has. Never mind the fact that they will scrap 2/3 of that obsolete force in the next 5-10 years and replace it with all new equipment and fully trained crews. Your assessment might be relevant if your talking about France with an economy and population base that is at best stagnant.
So, is China growing? At the risk of offending Regina I will post a link to verify. Economy - overview
$1:
In late 1978 the Chinese leadership began moving the economy from a sluggish, inefficient, Soviet-style centrally planned economy to a more market-oriented system. Whereas the system operates within a political framework of strict Communist control, the economic influence of non-state organizations and individual citizens has been steadily increasing. The authorities switched to a system of household and village responsibility in agriculture in place of the old collectivization, increased the authority of local officials and plant managers in industry, permitted a wide variety of small-scale enterprises in services and light manufacturing, and opened the economy to increased foreign trade and investment. The result has been a quadrupling of GDP since 1978. Measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, China in 2004 stood as the second-largest economy in the world after the US, although in per capita terms the country is still poor. Agriculture and industry have posted major gains especially in coastal areas near Hong Kong and opposite Taiwan and in Shanghai, where foreign investment has helped spur output of both domestic and export goods. As part of its effort to gradually slow the rapid economic growth seen in 2004, Beijing says it will reduce somewhat its spending on infrastructure in 2005, while continuing to focus on poverty relief and through rural tax reform. Accession to the World Trade Organization helps strengthen its ability to maintain strong growth rates but at the same time puts additional pressure on the hybrid system of strong political controls and growing market influences. China has benefited from a huge expansion in computer Internet use, with 94 million users at the end of 2004. Foreign investment remains a strong element in China's remarkable economic growth. Shortages of electric power and raw materials may affect industrial output in 2005. More power generating capacity is scheduled to come on line in 2006. In its rivalry with India as an economic power, China has a lead in the absorption of technology, the rising prominence in world trade, and the alleviation of poverty; India has one important advantage in its relative mastery of the English language, but the number of competent Chinese English-speakers is growing rapidly.
GDP growth rate:9.1% forcasts have that nearing 10%. We also know the population is growing at such a rate in China that they had to enforce 1 child only laws. This will be difficult for China to do and time will tell how successfully will be but if they continue on target they will be in far better shape then India in 15 years. Also, there is a major push to learn english in China and it is on a national level. Students as young as eight or nine years old in major Chinese cities are required to learn English. Something India can not do on that scale. Being able to rapidly adapt and have the entire country resources used in focused determination is a hallmark of China. This translates into rapid, focused and effective change. Does it not stand to reason that they are using that exact same determination for their military as well? And does it not also stand to reason that such technology they will use will be openly sold on the world market from such countries as Pakistan, Israel, Brazil the EU and Russia? They already have 800 missiles pointed at Taiwan.
You also heard there were war games with Russia recently. China-Russian War Games Simulate Naval Blockade. Do you think Russia will side with the US when push comes to shove? That was only a dress rehearsal and you should see some of the equipment they have now. Not rusted boats and radarless planes that can't even break the sound barrier, we are talking kh-555 cruise missiles. China is loaded by the bear.
China: Ready, steady, go
$1:
An emerging consensus among long-time PLA observers, including within the US intelligence community, is that the Chinese military has successfully achieved a far-reaching qualitative advancement in its warfighting capabilities since the beginning of this decade. The PLA is quickly becoming an increasingly credible threat against Taiwan and could even begin to pose a challenge to US military preponderance in East Asia in the next decade if the momentum is sustained.
The ground forces are currently engaged in the latest in a series of cutbacks that will result in a 10 per cent reduction of troop numbers from 1.6 million to 1.4 million by the end of this year. Since the mid-1990s, a large number of the PLA's estimated 100 manoeuvre divisions have been downsized, deactivated or transferred into the paramilitary police, leaving around 40 divisions and 43 brigades.
With a vast arsenal of outdated equipment, military chiefs are seeking to maximise the effectiveness of their limited funds by selectively procuring modest amounts of new advanced weapons while devoting substantial resources to upgrading existing equipment and investing heavily in the development of next-generation weapons that are compatible with its new concept of IT-based warfare.
The PLAAF has been at the top of the PLA's funding allocations for much of the past decade, which has led to a concerted effort to upgrade capabilities through the acquisition of predominately Russian weapon systems.
The PLAAF now has around 300 advanced Russian and Chinese combat aircraft, which are armed with sophisticated munitions. Air force chiefs, however, also face the pressing challenge of coping with the spreading obsolescence that affects the rest of its inventory of more than 3,000 combat aircraft.
The PLA Navy (PLAN) is rapidly transforming itself from a coastal force into a bluewater naval power with a force modernisation drive that is unprecedented in the post-Cold War era. "The range and number of warships the Chinese navy is acquiring can be compared to the Soviet Union's race to become an ocean-going navy to rival the US in the 1970s," said a China-based foreign naval attaché.
The pace and extent of the PLAN's expansion efforts, which has gained significant momentum in the past few years, is attracting heightened attention and concern in the US, Japan, Taiwan and other Asian littoral states. At a Congressional hearing in February, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that the growth of the Chinese navy was an issue that the Pentagon "thinks about and is concerned about and is attentive to". The US intelligence community has reported that since 2001, the Chinese shipbuilding industry has produced 23 new amphibious assault ships and 13 conventional attack submarines.
The ground forces are currently engaged in the latest in a series of cutbacks that will result in a 10 per cent reduction of troop numbers from 1.6 million to 1.4 million by the end of this year. Since the mid-1990s, a large number of the PLA's estimated 100 manoeuvre divisions have been downsized, deactivated or transferred into the paramilitary police, leaving around 40 divisions and 43 brigades.
With a vast arsenal of outdated equipment, military chiefs are seeking to maximise the effectiveness of their limited funds by selectively procuring modest amounts of new advanced weapons while devoting substantial resources to upgrading existing equipment and investing heavily in the development of next-generation weapons that are compatible with its new concept of IT-based warfare.
The PLAAF has been at the top of the PLA's funding allocations for much of the past decade, which has led to a concerted effort to upgrade capabilities through the acquisition of predominately Russian weapon systems.
The PLAAF now has around 300 advanced Russian and Chinese combat aircraft, which are armed with sophisticated munitions. Air force chiefs, however, also face the pressing challenge of coping with the spreading obsolescence that affects the rest of its inventory of more than 3,000 combat aircraft.
The PLA Navy (PLAN) is rapidly transforming itself from a coastal force into a bluewater naval power with a force modernisation drive that is unprecedented in the post-Cold War era. "The range and number of warships the Chinese navy is acquiring can be compared to the Soviet Union's race to become an ocean-going navy to rival the US in the 1970s," said a China-based foreign naval attaché.
The pace and extent of the PLAN's expansion efforts, which has gained significant momentum in the past few years, is attracting heightened attention and concern in the US, Japan, Taiwan and other Asian littoral states. At a Congressional hearing in February, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that the growth of the Chinese navy was an issue that the Pentagon "thinks about and is concerned about and is attentive to". The US intelligence community has reported that since 2001, the Chinese shipbuilding industry has produced 23 new amphibious assault ships and 13 conventional attack submarines.
Regina @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:28 am
Although you're probably the biggest Link Whore on this web site, providing an opinion or other non linked input to go with it would be good.
BartSimpson @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 7:55 am
SprCForr SprCForr:
More to follow on the "what if". I've asked for some direction from Regina about placing the thread etc.
Slightly off topic, but did any of you see the news clips today about the joint Russian/Chinese military exercises? I'm getting the heebie-jeebies thinking about it!
Slightly off topic, but did any of you see the news clips today about the joint Russian/Chinese military exercises? I'm getting the heebie-jeebies thinking about it!
Joint exercises often occur between potential adversaries and not just allies. There's a long tradition of this kind of thing going on and when it involves adversaries it's oft a matter of showing the other guy why he should not mess with you. You go out with your best stuff and play your best game in hopes to deter an attack.
While Russia and China play war games be sure to remind yourself that this is against the backdrop of China's recent demands that Russia allow China to invade and annex Mongolia which is currently in Russia's sphere of influence. I'm sure the Russians will just LOVE to have Chinese armoured divisions along a few more thousand miles of their eastern frontier.
BartSimpson @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 7:57 am
Regina Regina:
Although you're probably the biggest Link Whore on this web site, providing an opinion or other non linked input to go with it would be good.
I'll second that nomination!
Thematic-Device @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:10 pm
Scape Scape:
Clearly your opinion is that China is static and will fight a war now with the antiques that it has. Never mind the fact that they will scrap 2/3 of that obsolete force in the next 5-10 years and replace it with all new equipment and fully trained crews. Your assessment might be relevant if your talking about France with an economy and population base that is at best stagnant.
But the thing is they can't replace that 2/3s of obsolete fighters. As I posted the fastest the can build the new migs is at the speed of 15 per year. The US can build, and sell to japan and Taiwan, fighters far faster. In the time of 5 years china might have finally built what taiwan could have ordered in a year. And in those 4 years since, have been training their pilots on. Taiwan can get more, faster, because China completely lacks a comparative or absolute advantage in production of advanced products.
China does not even produce suitable defense products when they do finally get them off the line, as evidenced by the experiance of Thailand who had requested that china produce them some tanks and a few hulls which they could outfit with US and European engines, weapons, and electronics. The chinese refused and insisted that they outfit the destroyers and gave a very competitive deal along with an expedited production schedule. The ships that Thailand got were complete disasters, and were forced to serve as patrol boats after being overhauled. The tanks belched black smoke wherever they went which made them rather easy to spot. Thailand insisted that the last two were sent as just hulls, and outfitted them as they pleased and got decent vessels out of them.
$1:
So, is China growing? At the risk of offending Regina I will post a link to verify. Economy - overview
GDP growth rate:9.1% forcasts have that nearing 10%. We also know the population is growing at such a rate in China that they had to enforce 1 child only laws. This will be difficult for China to do and time will tell how successfully will be but if they continue on target they will be in far better shape then India in 15 years. Also, there is a major push to learn english in China and it is on a national level. Students as young as eight or nine years old in major Chinese cities are required to learn English. Something India can not do on that scale.
$1:
In late 1978 the Chinese leadership began moving the economy from a sluggish, inefficient, Soviet-style centrally planned economy to a more market-oriented system. Whereas the system operates within a political framework of strict Communist control, the economic influence of non-state organizations and individual citizens has been steadily increasing. The authorities switched to a system of household and village responsibility in agriculture in place of the old collectivization, increased the authority of local officials and plant managers in industry, permitted a wide variety of small-scale enterprises in services and light manufacturing, and opened the economy to increased foreign trade and investment. The result has been a quadrupling of GDP since 1978. Measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, China in 2004 stood as the second-largest economy in the world after the US, although in per capita terms the country is still poor. Agriculture and industry have posted major gains especially in coastal areas near Hong Kong and opposite Taiwan and in Shanghai, where foreign investment has helped spur output of both domestic and export goods. As part of its effort to gradually slow the rapid economic growth seen in 2004, Beijing says it will reduce somewhat its spending on infrastructure in 2005, while continuing to focus on poverty relief and through rural tax reform. Accession to the World Trade Organization helps strengthen its ability to maintain strong growth rates but at the same time puts additional pressure on the hybrid system of strong political controls and growing market influences. China has benefited from a huge expansion in computer Internet use, with 94 million users at the end of 2004. Foreign investment remains a strong element in China's remarkable economic growth. Shortages of electric power and raw materials may affect industrial output in 2005. More power generating capacity is scheduled to come on line in 2006. In its rivalry with India as an economic power, China has a lead in the absorption of technology, the rising prominence in world trade, and the alleviation of poverty; India has one important advantage in its relative mastery of the English language, but the number of competent Chinese English-speakers is growing rapidly.
GDP growth rate:9.1% forcasts have that nearing 10%. We also know the population is growing at such a rate in China that they had to enforce 1 child only laws. This will be difficult for China to do and time will tell how successfully will be but if they continue on target they will be in far better shape then India in 15 years. Also, there is a major push to learn english in China and it is on a national level. Students as young as eight or nine years old in major Chinese cities are required to learn English. Something India can not do on that scale.
Bullshit its not something India can't do, its something that India did. Re-read your constant links, they are playing catchup with india.
$1:
Being able to rapidly adapt and have the entire country resources used in focused determination is a hallmark of China. This translates into rapid, focused and effective change. Does it not stand to reason that they are using that exact same determination for their military as well? And does it not also stand to reason that such technology they will use will be openly sold on the world market from such countries as Pakistan, Israel, Brazil the EU and Russia? They already have 800 missiles pointed at Taiwan.
Ballistic Missiles, the horribly innaccurate kind that only work if you strap a nuclear warhead to them. And if they do that, expect the nuclear powers to launch preemptive nuclear strikes on the sites that can reach them, and at that point, if they decide not to invade China, China can expect at the very least, a complete embargo, not allowing anything in or out.
$1:
Do you think Russia will side with the US when push comes to shove?
Russia would have the good sense to stay out of China attempting to take taiwan. If China used a nuclear weapon, Russia would also have the good sense to side with the US because that way, armeggedon is avoided. (And they'll get a favorable redrawing of the borders if they wanted it)
$1:
That was only a dress rehearsal and you should see some of the equipment they have now. Not rusted boats and radarless planes that can't even break the sound barrier, we are talking kh-555 cruise missiles. China is loaded by the bear.
Funny, that article didn't mention in the least China having possession of them. And they won't for at least 30 years. Russia and the United States are similiar in the fact that they keep the best toys for themselves. Why do you think Taiwan has to buy subs from europe? Why do you think that Russia only exports its older equipment?
Furthermore the absolute limit China can move at a time with their sealift capabilities, is 5 divisions, at a time, to land more they would need to send their ships back to land and reload, perhaps a 3 day endeavour, which would give taiwan more then enough time for Taiwans 20 odd divisions to sweep in and whipe out the landing party. Amphibious assaults are the toughest possible, and require that you outright overwhelm the enemy through shear numerical superiority.
Even if china doubles their lift capability they would still be outnumbered by around 2 to 1, against a better equipped, dug in enemy, who will most likely have air superiority, awacs support, and sea-skimming anti-ship missiles sure to take out those pesky landing craft, in addition to portable anti-air missiles which can help take down the pesky migs if the Taiwanese Air Force doesn't handle them.
It would be a reenactment of the mongolian attempt to conquer Japan, just this time, it won't be a miracolous storm taking out the ships, but Harpoon Anti-Ship missiles, Ticonderoga and Laffeyette Cruisers, and Air Superiority.
http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/amphibious/default.asp
BartSimpson @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:22 pm
Not to mention the USA would weigh in to help Japan. China might...maybe...be able to attack Taiwan and get away with it if the political climate in Washington is pro-Beijing or pacifist enough. But attacking Japan would bring the USA into full swing against China and they'd undoubtedly get to see all the shiny toys we keep at Groom Lake in the skies over the PRC.
Scape @ Wed Aug 24, 2005 1:13 pm
In India there are practically no land line phone service, whereas they have over 60 cellular networks and very few of them have nation wide coverage. India is one of the worst for quality in terms of standardization. It is only marginally better than Brazil in it antiquated design and the reason for this is there is little to no regulation and it is rife with corruption. Almost no one in India has a land line.
In China there are 2 STANDARDIZED companies that give nation wide coverage that is on par with the coverage in Europe that has had cell networks since the 1990s.
This is what we are comparing here and there is a huge gap in how China and India use their respective resources. Since regulation and standardization is only in its most basic stages in India and corruption in India makes enforcing such concepts laughable at best it has no staying power to compete in the long term vs China.
The next time you call an American company that outsources it's customer service to India tell me if you can understand what they are saying, know that the service is prompt and you don't have to call back 16 times to make sure the job gets done right. India has more in common with Mexico than with China.
It is this standardization and ruthless regimentation across the country that China has constantly demonstrated like the Three Gorges Dam Project that China showcases it's real strength.
Next, why is it that China needed thousands of obsolete fighters in the 1st place? The Bear was at the door
$1:
In the early 1980s, out of a total of 194 active tank, motorized rifle and airborne divisions in the Soviet force, 65 were located in the western USSR, 30 in Eastern Europe and an additional 20 in the Transcaucasus and North Caucasus Military Districts (MDs). All these divisions would were available for offensive operations against NATO. In addition to these forces, 17 low-strength divisions, centrally located in the USSR, constituted the Strategic Reserves. For operation in the Southern Theater the Soviets had in place six divisions in the Turkestan MD and four engaged in combat operations in Afghanistan. These forces could be reinforced by the 20 divisions from the Caucasus MDs if they were not engaged against NATO. Soviet forces for operations in the Far East were composed of 52 tank and motorized rifle divisions. The six Warsaw Pact Allies of the Soviet Union had a total of 55 active divisions, which, collectively with Soviet divisions, amounted to 249 combat divisions.
China has considered Russia to be an enemy because of the level and presence of so many divisions on it's boarder since the 1960s.
Since the end of the cold war relations have thawed somewhat and China has Hong Kong and has been tinkering with free market reforms. Bush wanted to be known as the great united and not a divider and in this case he has united two former enemies. We can't say the same for the ANZUS alliance. Anyone care to comment as to why New Zealand is now know as a friend but not an ally?
$1:
After consultations with Australia and after negotations with New Zealand broke down, the United States announced that it was suspending its treaty obligations to New Zealand until United States Navy ships were re-admitted to New Zealand ports, citing that New Zealand was "a friend, but not an ally". The crisis made front-page headlines for weeks in many American newspapers, while many American cabinet members were quoted as expressing a deep sense of "betrayal". It is still often incorrectly stated that David Lange withdrew New Zealand from ANZUS - he did no such thing; his government's policy may well have led to the US's decision to suspend its treaty obligations to New Zealand, but that was still a decision of the US government, not the New Zealand government.
Lastly, someone mentioned Japan would pitch in. Anyone know how big the Japanese army is? The only real ally in the Pacific the US has of any size is Australia. So when, not if, China and Russia blockade Taiwan will there be any real resistance?