What's new

CHINA DANGEROUS WEAKNESS.

China has a more powerful airforce than the Japanese as there is no way that the Japanese air-force can beat the 300 J-10 and 300 Su-27/30/J11.

It is true that the Japanese Navy is better than the Chinese but give it a few more years and with the induction of more Type-052C and the newer Type-052D, then China will be comfortably ahead.

By 2020, China will be >> Japan in military power

Aren't you underestimating Japan? You are comparing China and Japan on a 1-1 basis. What about the various security treaties Japan has signed in lieu of arming itself to protect against aggression from countries like China. Similar to what Taiwan signed with U.S which is what keeps China at a distance instead of claiming Taiwan through military aggression. Japan has a defence cooperation treaty signed with US and so is the reason US has its soldiers in Japanese soil. So don't you think any aggression against Japan would not just invite US but also other allies of hers in support of her?
 
.
People forgot that China has more artilleries than Japan. In the ground, China could decimate pretty much every JSDGF divisions and units. China could wipe out hundreds of military bases in just an hour.

World Military Strength Comparison

China has 25,000 artillery pieces, while Japan has 480. If China uses 6,500 against Japanese ground force, then the Japanese would lose thousands of men.

China dominates the ground. They can turn Tokyo into rubbles. Japan doesn't have enough men.

I think China outguns Japan. I don't care what America says. The Japanese suck up to them.
 
.
The article was by
Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. is the deputy editor for Breaking Defense. During his 13 years at National Journal magazine, he wrote his first story about what became known as "homeland security" in 1998, his first story about "military transformation" in 1999, and his first story on "asymmetrical warfare" in 2000. Since 2004 he has conducted in-depth interviews with more than 200 veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq about their experiences, insights, and lessons-learned, writing stories that won awards from the association of Military Reporters & Editors in 2008 and 2009, as well as an honorable mention in 2010.

The article is dated
Friday, September 27, 2013

Its an article in an internet magazine that caters to the defense industry.

If an intelligent person has a choice they will pick professional sources over a bunch of ignorant fan boys every time.
 
. .
I'm actually glad Japan is building up its military.

Why?

Because this will force us to accelerate our military build up which will be good for us long term.

You need a strategic rival to constantly push you to get better (US vs USSR). This way both countries advance at a rapid rate. An arms race is very much needed in Asia to advance all our technologies and military capabilities.

Japan is doing us a favour when you think about it from a different angle.
 
. .
I'm actually glad Japan is building up its military.

Why?

Because this will force us to accelerate our military build up which will be good for us long term.

You need a strategic rival to constantly push you to get better (US vs USSR). This way both countries advance at a rapid rate. An arms race is very much needed in Asia to advance all our technologies and military capabilities.

Japan is doing us a favour when you think about it from a different angle.
I agree 100%! I want Japan to fully re-militarized. This will allow us a no-held back and go all out without fearing Western condemnation and international media backlash on the "threat perception".

In addition, we do have a score to settle. Let China vs Japan arm race begins!!
 
.
WASHINGTON: From this city’s perspective, China looks like a rising giant, liable to dominate its smaller neighbors unless America stands firm. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will likely carry soothing words of reassurance on this very subject to Seoul and Tokyo when he travels there next week.

From Beijing’s point of view, however, it is China that looks like the underdog – and, at least in the near term, they’ve got a point. Unfortunately, this sense of relative weakness doesn’t make the dragon pull in its horns. To the contrary, feeling vulnerable makes the Chinese skittish in dangerous and provocative ways.

Despite two decades of investment, China’s military is still outgunned by Japan, let alone by the US. “Japan has the strongest navy and air force in Asia except for the United States,” leading analyst Larry Wortzel said Wednesday at the Institute of World Politics, pointing at a map of northeast Asia: “This shows their air force bases and how they’re postured….”

“You said Japan?” interrupted an incredulous member of the audience.

“Japan, that’s correct, absolutely,” said Wortzel. “The most modern, the most effective. [They’re] still restricted by Article 9 of the Constitution” – which “forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation” – “but you don’t want to mess with them.”

And that’s just one US ally. South Korea has a formidable military of its own. Then there’s America’s own military which, despite painful budget cuts, remains the largest and most high-tech in the world, at least for now. So the balance of forces in the Western Pacific still favors the democracies.

That’s the geostrategic good news. The bad news is that Beijing isn’t handling it well.

Two centuries of insecurity have conditioned Chinese leaders to be a little light on the trigger finger. So while Chinese strategy documents consistently speak of self-defense – the current official “active defense” – “I think you have to not be very literal when you read this stuff,” Wortzel said. “It’s a fairly prickly and aggressive military doctrine inside a defensive structure.”

“A lot of what they do is very heavily built on preemption,” Wortzel explained. “When you read the diplomatic literature out of China, all their attacks are ‘preemptive counterattacks.’ When they went into Korea [in 1950], it was a preemptive counterattack. When they went into Vietnam [in 1974 and 1979], it was a preemptive counterattack. When they went into India in 1962, it was a preemptive counterattack.”

It’s not that China was entirely unprovoked in these cases. In 1950, they saw US forces steamrolling over their North Korean ally and surging towards the Chinese with no guarantee the Americans would stop at the Yalu. (Indeed, Gen. Douglas MacArthur wanted a wider war with China, which is why Harry Truman finally fired him). In both 1962 and 1979, there had been skirmishes along the disputed borders for years. But in each case, the Chinese response was to escalate – massively, bloodily, and unexpectedly.

These examples aren’t just ancient history. The principle of preemption is a big part of China’s “active defense” doctrine today, said retired Rear Admiral Michael McDevitt, speaking on a panel at the Wilson Center earlier on Wednesday. “They don’t have to wait and take the first shot,” he said. Indeed, Chinese doctrine does not limit itself to preempting a military attack, he said: “China claims ‘if you act diplomatically to challenge our sovereignty….we have the right to preemptively attack as part of our active defense strategy.’”

“If you’re a country that lives in the shadow of China, how would you feel?” asked McDevitt. “China says, don’t worry, ‘it’s only defense, I’m only defending myself against attack,’ but [China] can also argue that ‘I don’t like what you’re doing, and I see that as a threat to my sovereignty, and I’m going to whack you.’”

China’s broad definitions of sovereignty and self-defense are especially unnerving given its long-running standoffs with Japan over the Senkaku Islands, known as the Diaoyus in Chinese, and with the Philippines over the Scarborough Shoal.

“In China’s view, they are non-aggressive because they do employ predominantly civilian vessels that are not heavily armed,” said Danish scholar Liselotte Odgaard at the Wilson Center discussion. But China claims for both its paramilitary and military vessels the right “to do as we please, when we please, without notifying you, and that’s totally unacceptable to the other countries,” said Odgaard. That’s because the People’s Republic feels it has some claim to any territory once controlled by the Imperial China – however briefly and however loosely – while its neighbors argue that jurisdictional rights from the 19th century, let alone from earlier, have long since expired.

The Chinese position is that “we’re being generous here by letting you use this area,” Odgaard said. From Beijing’s point of view, in other words, they’re already making a concession on the disputed territories by not just kicking the Japanese, Filipinos, and others out.

That said, there is a distinctly pragmatic dimension to this “generosity,” because the People’s Liberation Army is painfully aware it lacks the firepower to kick them out. Unless China resorts to nuclear weapons, Japan and Korea can defend themselves. While weaker, the Philippines have had US backing for over a century, and Vietnam chewed up China’s invasion force in 1979 without any outside help. What China has been struggling to do for at least the last two decades is develop a military that can keep America at bay with what US strategists call an “anti-access/area-denial” (A2/AD) defense. How far the PLA has actually moved towards that goal is the subject of the second part of this article, out tomorrow.
China

Japan yes strongest Navy but Strongest Air Force either this man has gone insane or is completely out of mind Mr
 
.
The article was by
Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. is the deputy editor for Breaking Defense. During his 13 years at National Journal magazine, he wrote his first story about what became known as "homeland security" in 1998, his first story about "military transformation" in 1999, and his first story on "asymmetrical warfare" in 2000. Since 2004 he has conducted in-depth interviews with more than 200 veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq about their experiences, insights, and lessons-learned, writing stories that won awards from the association of Military Reporters & Editors in 2008 and 2009, as well as an honorable mention in 2010.

The article is dated
Friday, September 27, 2013

Its an article in an internet magazine that caters to the defense industry.

If an intelligent person has a choice they will pick professional sources over a bunch of ignorant fan boys every time.

He don't even know that different between F-15J and F-15C.:omghaha::rofl:
 
.
People forgot that China has more artilleries than Japan. In the ground, China could decimate pretty much every JSDGF divisions and units. China could wipe out hundreds of military bases in just an hour.

World Military Strength Comparison

China has 25,000 artillery pieces, while Japan has 480. If China uses 6,500 against Japanese ground force, then the Japanese would lose thousands of men.

China dominates the ground. They can turn Tokyo into rubbles. Japan doesn't have enough men.

I think China outguns Japan. I don't care what America says. The Japanese suck up to them.
Sorry...But I have to jump in here...I will put it as kindly as possible...But your argument is just plain stupid.

China cannot reach Japan by artillery. In order to use artillery, China would have to literally invade the Japanese home islands. China does not have any credible amphibious force. If China cannot achieve air supremacy over the Sea of Japan and over the Japanese home islands, any attempt at amphibious assault will turn into artificial reefs.

If you want to talk about sucking up, this argument is one such. It have no value outside of making the Chinese members here feel good.
 
.
Well, it is true that China is still outgunned by Japan. Japan nationalized the Daiyu islands last year and basically Chinese response was very "unimpressive" to say the least.

CCP is not the answer for China to become a superpower. Communism is a foreign doctrine that does not suit traditional Chinese thinking. I think adopting the Qin's Legalist concept will make China strong.

Well China did not have any choice because the world is controlled by the USA and it was the Americans who took those Islands and gave them to Japan. What do you expect China to do ? Launch a war on Japan and take back those Islands ? Bad move !
 
.
Sorry...But I have to jump in:omghaha: here...I will put it as kindly as possible...But your argument is just plain stupid.

China cannot reach Japan by artillery. In order to use artillery, China would have to literally invade the Japanese home islands. China does not have any credible amphibious force. If China cannot achieve air supremacy over the Sea of Japan and over the Japanese home islands, any attempt at amphibious assault will turn into artificial reefs.

If you want to talk about sucking up, this argument is one such. It have no value outside of making the Chinese members here feel good.

Yes,he is just plain stupid same as anallyst Larry Wortzel.
"Japan has the strongest air force in Asia":omghaha:
ROKAF and IAF don't agree with the stupid anallyst.
 
.
Sorry...But I have to jump in here...I will put it as kindly as possible...But your argument is just plain stupid.

China cannot reach Japan by artillery. In order to use artillery, China would have to literally invade the Japanese home islands. China does not have any credible amphibious force. If China cannot achieve air supremacy over the Sea of Japan and over the Japanese home islands, any attempt at amphibious assault will turn into artificial reefs.

If you want to talk about sucking up, this argument is one such. It have no value outside of making the Chinese members here feel good.

So maybe we should compare ballistic and cruise missile numbers.
 
. .
If an intelligent person has a choice they will pick professional sources over a bunch of ignorant fan boys every time.

Actually , an intelligent person would be open to criticism and suggestions and in possession of critical thinking mind and not just take the word of any defense analyst as Gospel truth :) Because there are several - so to be generous unacceptable inaccuracies in the article . China has come a long way and at the moment , Tokyo really is lagging behind .
 
.
Back
Top Bottom