Author Topic: China/Taiwan (Read 3092 times)

NUKE · « **Reply #150 on:** January 23, 2005, 03:45:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Doesn't the word "decimate" mean to reduce by one-tenth?

you know just as well as I what it means. Words have many meanings, decided by context

Quote

To destroy or kill a large part of (a group). 2. Usage Problem a. To inflict great destruction or damage on: The fawns decimated my rose bushes. b. To reduce markedly in amount:

That's what I meant. And I have not heard anyone who could argue that the US could not decimate China with conventional forces, while being untouchable in the US mainland.

In other words, the US could destroy a large part of China with conventional forces and China could not touch the US mainland.

China is not a superpower. The US is.

In 20 years, China may be a superpower, but now they are not.

patrone · « **Reply #151 on:** January 23, 2005, 03:47:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz

Yes ... diesel subs are no threat to nuke-subs ... that's why the USN is trying to lease a new Swedish boat to train against.

Get a clue.

You must be kidding me,...what could possibly US navy learn from a little country as ours? About Subs? Like the Sterling engine and that new plastic propeller that dos´nt give absolutly a sound away?

weaselsan · « **Reply #152 on:** January 23, 2005, 03:48:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Yeah, and the Russian "version" is the Typhoon SSBN ... you are so talking out of your ass.

These look like "antiquated rusty diesel subs" to you?

Kilo class SSK (Type 636, 3,730t dived)

The submarine can carry up to 18 TEST-71, TEST-96 or 53-65KE wire-guided torpedoes to be fired by 6 torpedo tubes, it may also be fitted with SA-N-8 SAM system as well. More significantly, the third and the fourth boats (366 & 367) are the latest Project 636 model, one of the quietest conventional submarines in the world (~117db). The latest report claimed that China ordered 8 Type 636s to be armed with the new Club-S series (3M54E, range 300km at Mach 0.8) SLCMs from Russia in May 2002, a move considered as China's response to Taiwan's order of 8 diesel subs from US. The contract worths $1.5b and will be fulfilled within 5 years, reflecting PLAN's urgency to build a credible submarine force against potential threats from US and Japanese naval forces.

Type 039 "Song"

This new class of SSG (Type 039, 2,250t dived) was launched in May 1994 but not commissioned until 1998. Although it still retains the stepped conning tower similar to the old Ming/Romeo class, the overall design represents a major step forward compared with the obsolete Ming class. The improvement includes a hydrodynamically sleek profile, new cylindrical bow mounted sonars and German MTU 12V 493 diesel engine. With a large asymmetrical seven-bladed skew propeller, the Song class is much quieter than its predecessor. It has been speculated that Song class is capable of launching modified YJ-8/C-801 ASMs as well as new wire-guided torpedos (Yu-6/Mk-48?) from its 533mm torpedo tubes.

Yes ... diesel subs are no threat to nuke-subs ... that's why the USN is trying to lease a new Swedish boat to train against.

Get a clue.

No No stupid.. the Chinese rusted diesel junk Thats all the old Russian nuclear rusted junk.

weaselsan · « **Reply #153 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:01:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
*lol* You are a complete moron! Both those boats are diesel/electrics, and both are in the PLAN (that's the Chinese navy if you didn't know).

The Chinese are buying rusty Russian Junk. Mostly nuclear. The diesels are useless.

NUKE · « **Reply #154 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:03:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
I do not see how the US could achieve that.

really?

You don't think we could bomb China almost at will? Cruise missles, electromagnetic bombs and whatever else we may have.

We could bomb China almost non stop for years if we really needed to, and they couldn't stop it.

weaselsan · « **Reply #155 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:03:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
I do not see how the US could achieve that.

The U.S. defeated the Soviet Union and never fired a shot...why would we want to attack China. We need China for cheap goods to sell at Wal-mart.

Thrawn · « **Reply #156 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:06:33 PM »

I'm not sure how the US would actually land troops in China.

How are the US Navy's ships going to get throught the thousands of anti-shipping missiles the Chinese have. Look at the damage a few Exocets did to the British in the Falklands.

And there is this as well.

"In Millennium Challenge 2002, a $250 million war game designed to test the new technologies and concepts of transformation and network-centric warfare—in which U.S. forces are data-linked with one another as never before—Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, former president of the Marine Corps University, was asked to command the "enemy" forces. In the first days of that mock battle, he used unconventional methods, including a preemptive attack that featured air-, sea-, and ground-launched cruise missiles to sink 16 American ships."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wartech/nature.html

weaselsan · « **Reply #157 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:11:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
I refuse to believe you are this stupid. You've got to be pulling my chain.

You really.. really believe that those Diesel subs in the Chinese Navy are a concern to the U.S. or Tiawan? I hope the Chinese are that stupid...but their not. Thats why you won't see an attack upon Taiwan. Every thing the Chinese do is based on Fear for there own survival. Once free enterprise takes hold in China they will fall faster than the Soviet Union did.

Thrawn · « **Reply #158 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:18:34 PM »

I think we don't see an attack on Taiwan because the world, especially the Pacific rim is beating a path to become thier economic *****.

Here's just one example.

"China hands Canada potential tourism windfall
Last Updated Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:51:19 EST
CBC News

BEIJING - China has recognized Canada as an approved tourism destination – a move that is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the number of Chinese visitors to this country.

...

China is one of the fastest growing economies in the world, and the recognition of Canada as an officially approved travel destination has significant economic potential for the Canadian tourism industry," Industry Minister David Emerson said in a statement from Beijing."

Why go to war with someone when the are doing what you want them to do anyway.

patrone · « **Reply #159 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:26:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
They want to lease one of your Gotland class SSK's. Very good sub btw.

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2004/nr20041029-1452.html

Yep, we learned everything we know from the best SUB navy, evar: the one with the "Electro Boots".

weaselsan · « **Reply #160 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:29:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
They want to lease one of your Gotland class SSK's. Very good sub btw.

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2004/nr20041029-1452.html

Well at least they will finally find a use for it.

weaselsan · « **Reply #161 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:32:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
I think we don't see an attack on Taiwan because the world, especially the Pacific rim is beating a path to become thier economic *****.

Here's just one example.

"China hands Canada potential tourism windfall
Last Updated Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:51:19 EST
CBC News

BEIJING - China has recognized Canada as an approved tourism destination – a move that is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the number of Chinese visitors to this country.

...

China is one of the fastest growing economies in the world, and the recognition of Canada as an officially approved travel destination has significant economic potential for the Canadian tourism industry," Industry Minister David Emerson said in a statement from Beijing."

Why go to war with someone when the are doing what you want them to do anyway.

You got the Idea Thrawn. There will be more Americans at the Great Wall than Disney world.

patrone · « **Reply #162 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:35:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Ditto. Our Ula class is a joint venture with the Germans (Type 210). Your Gotland is superior though since it has an AIP system. I wonder if we will upgrade our Ula's with that.

I dont think they will, think you will have to buy Swedish made SUBS to get it. Australia has and I am not sure if the system was on the delivred one.

China has been interested to.........

( I am talking about technology that only Sweden and the russians had, after wwII, about SUBS)

-tronski- · « **Reply #163 on:** January 23, 2005, 04:55:56 PM »

I agree with the argument that China's military could not currently successfully sustain an operation against an aggressive US offensive, however I don't believe currently the US armed forces could pick China apart at will.

China will be the major regional player conventionally in 10 to 15 years. The large scale modernising of their military (especially the PLA-AF, and PLA-N) will start to bear fruit when most western forces current oncoming block obsolescence would most likely have suffered from budgetary constraints.

Tronsky