What's new

China is making a bet that no one will start a war to stop the island building

Yes, the United nations invasion of North Korea in retaliation for its invasion of South Korea was repelled by primarily Chinese forces...
the part that goes unmentioned usually is that China (and the remaining NorKs) then attempted to invade South Korea and were forced out, just like North Korea was repelled earlier.

This is a common point of contention as certain Chinese posters argue that the war only started for some reason when they chose to enter it, and that only north Korea was the battlespace, while from our viewpoint, the war started when North Korea invaded South Korea and the whole Korean peninsula was the battlespace. Given that China did indeed attempt to invade South Korea itself and was repelled, this is either ignorance, or academic dishonesty.

From our standpoint, defeat was being forced to vacate the peninsula to the communists. As far as we are concerned the war was a stalemate, as South Korea had no loss of territory.
Yes, China was only forced out of the South for its lack of proper equipment. Don't think they will have the same problem now.
 
.
Indonesia will never take side with china or any other nation, i guarantee you that
Since you speak for the Indonesian Government, I suppose we must all agree. Lol...

You are disgustingly disloyal to it. Please, please tell me you do not actually hold American citizenship! Because if you do, when you gleefully say things like this...



...I can't believe that anyone could be such a scumbag as to enjoy the freedom, opportunity, and friendship of America and your American friends, while you boast on PDF at how you will see their sons and daughters die on American aircraft carriers. :disagree:
Stop making it sound like there are many "white" Americans who are loyal. I know many "white" Americans who speak against the US. It's because the US messed up! Messed up where? I don't need to tell you that.
You trying to protect the US just shows you're anti - anything but the US. You're just biased in everything!

Sometime, people don't get to choose where they stay. It is part of the job. And I am sure many American living in China would wish dead to our people if our country fight, so spare me with your high moral nonsense.
Don't worry too much, brother. There are many Americans (white) who actually speaks against the US. Let him tell those white Americans ladened with guns to go home too.
He doesn't understand everyone's got an opinion. Lol, he's the only person who's opinion matters. Talk about double standards.
 
.
Yes, China was only forced out of the South for its lack of proper equipment. Don't think they will have the same problem now.

Which kind of makes the stated Chinese fears of US troops in a United South Korea rather dishonest. The amount of troops we have in South Korea would be negligible against a Chinese offensive, its our other levers and the expansion of the battlespace outside of land that should give China pause.
 
.
Which kind of makes the stated Chinese fears of US troops in a United South Korea rather dishonest. The amount of troops we have in South Korea would be negligible against a Chinese offensive, its our other levers and the expansion of the battlespace outside of land that should give China pause.
China has prepared itself for a war against US within the South China sea. They have zero interest fighting a war outside of it at the moment. They have aircraft destroyer missiles that can be fired from the mainland. They have an extremely large missile arsenal, along with their air force, navy and land forces.
 
.
China has prepared itself for a war against US within the South China sea. They have zero interest fighting a war outside of it at the moment. They have aircraft destroyer missiles that can be fired from the mainland. They have an extremely large missile arsenal, along with their air force, navy and land forces.


The US has global sanctions, allies, regional opinion, battlespace awareness, and global reach.
I'd say that has more utility and is a greater enduring advantage, both at peace and war, than a large missile arsenal.

I don't think I need to mention US weapons systems, Its safe to say that their navy and AF's reputation is 2nd to none.
 
.
The US has global sanctions, allies, regional opinion, battlespace awareness, and global reach.
I'd say that has more utility and is a greater enduring advantage, both at peace and war, than a large missile arsenal.

I don't think I need to mention US weapons systems, Its safe to say that their navy and AF's reputation is 2nd to none.

I think it's important to note that the DF-21D has never been tested against a moving ship at sea, and I haven't seen any credible evidence to indicate otherwise. Of course, the US Navy won't underestimate such a threat. US Admirals have hinted in the past that electronic countermeasures have been developed to sever the kill chain of a DF-21D. You see, a complex architecture of radars and sensors have to operate effectively for the DF-21D to complete its mission successfully. Therein lies the vulnerability of the DF-21D. Not to mention the US Navy has hard kill options in the SM-3, SM-6, and SM-2IV.

The US also has a large missile arsenal of 7000+ cruise missiles and a bomb arsenal that numbers in the tens of thousands. The US is the master at the employment and delivery of long range precision strike packages. They've been perfecting it for almost 3 decades now.
 
.
The US also has a large missile arsenal of 7000+ cruise missiles and a bomb arsenal that numbers in the tens of thousands. The US is the master at the employment and delivery of long range precision strike packages. They've been perfecting it for almost 3 decades now.
You think the Chinese don't know how many cruise missiles you have? But do you know how many the Chinese have?
But let's just say, the DF21D and the DF26, does find their targets, all that 7000+ and the ten of thousand of bomb stacked in those ships will make good fish food. I guess you haven't given a thought on this.

You'll be lucky If those fishes love the taste of burgers.
 
.
You think the Chinese don't know how many cruise missiles you have? But do you know how many the Chinese have?
But let's just say, the DF21D and the DF26, does find their targets, all that 7000+ and the ten of thousand of bomb stacked in those ships will make good fish food. I guess you haven't given a thought on this.

You'll be lucky If those fishes love the taste of burgers.

As I stated, the US has a multitude of options to deal with the ASBM threat. You do understand that the US launches cruise missiles from submarines and bombers/fighters? The US is actually significantly expanding its air launched cruise missile inventory with JASSM and JASSM-ERs. The US ability to launch those cruise missiles from the 3 domains (air, sea, undersea) minimizes the risk of a single point of failure.
 
.
As I stated, the US has a multitude of options to deal with the ASBM threat. You do understand that the US launches cruise missiles from submarines and bombers/fighters? The US is actually significantly expanding its air launched cruise missile inventory with JASSM and JASSM-ERs. The US ability to launch those cruise missiles from the 3 domains (air, sea, undersea) minimizes the risk of a single point of failure.
Most of the missiles will be stacked on the ships. Even the bombers will be on the carrier before they can arm themselves and take off.
Your subs will be too busy with 80 chinese subs underwater.
Also, there is no hard evidence you have that you can defend against the ASBM WITH A MACH 10 at terminal velocity.
We can talk the whole day but nothing will be fruitful since there will be no war. They are just posturing.
Btw, are you in the military?
 
.
Most of the missiles will be stacked on the ships. Even the bombers will be on the carrier before they can arm themselves and take off.
Your subs will be too busy with 80 chinese subs underwater.
Also, there is no hard evidence you have that you can defend against the ASBM WITH A MACH 10 at terminal velocity.
We can talk the whole day but nothing will be fruitful since there will be no war. They are just posturing.
Btw, are you in the military?
Most of the missiles on the ships? Bombers flying off carriers? I stopped reading right there. I'll just say the U.S. military has the tools to handle a crisis in the Western Pacific. They operate there on a daily basis, and our relationships with the majority of China's neighbors are growing stronger.
 
.
Most of the missiles on the ships? Bombers flying off carriers? I stopped reading right there. I'll just say the U.S. military has the tools to handle a crisis in the Western Pacific. They operate there on a daily basis, and our relationships with the majority of China's neighbors are growing stronger.

You seems to forget your space asset, no matter how you cozy with China's neighbors, US is not beyond our reach, there is call asymmetrical warfare, you Americans will never feel safe as before which you can attack without getting retaliation. :coffee:
 
.
Most of the missiles on the ships? Bombers flying off carriers? I stopped reading right there. I'll just say the U.S. military has the tools to handle a crisis in the Western Pacific. They operate there on a daily basis, and our relationships with the majority of China's neighbors are growing stronger.
You've never seen bombers taking off from an aircraft carrier? Maybe not the B1 or the B2 bombers. But yes, there are bombers which does take off from an aircraft carrier. You just need to Google.
 
.
Here's a great article that came out today of the US Chief of Naval Operations talking about how the US Navy will use electromagnetic countermeasures against long range antiship missiles. This is exactly what I was referring to earlier in the thread.


CNO Richardson: Navy Needs Distributed Force Of Networked Ships, Subs To Counter A2/AD Threat

140729-N-IP531-108.jpg

An F/A-18E Super Hornet from the Dambusters of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 195, left, and an E-2C Hawkeye from the Liberty Bells of Airborne Early Warning Squadron (VAW) 115 fly over the U.S. Navy’s forward-deployed aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) on July 29, 2014


WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Navy will have to continue expanding its own integrated fire control network and exploiting weaknesses in adversaries’ networks to succeed in a future operating environment that includes ever-advancing long-range anti-ship cruise missiles, the chief of naval operations said.

Adm. John Richardson said Thursday at the McAleese/Credit Suisse FY 2017 Defense Programs Conference that a map of the oceans today looks scarier than it did even a couple years ago – coastal defense cruise missile batteries can cover a radius of 700 or 800 miles today, compared to 70 or 80 even a few years ago – but Richardson made clear that the U.S. Navy would not be deterred from operating in and around those chokepoints.

Asked about continued concerns that carrier strike groups shouldn’t operate in those contested environments as missiles continue to increase in range and quantity, Richardson said one way to succeed is to operate in a distributed manner and leverage electromagnetic warfare to confuse and challenge an adversary’s kill chain.

sssn_774_2010.jpg

USS Virginia (SSN-774) in 2010.

“We are constantly maneuvering. We are a global maneuver force, and so that data is highly perishable: as soon as you sense that ship, whether it’s an aircraft carrier or whatever, that’s going to be obsolete data very quickly,” Richardson said.
“And then we’ve got technologies to make every part of that kill chain, if you will, very very difficult. So it’s easy to draw these radii around and say everything inside of there is forboden. It’s just not the case. So I’ll take that carrier strike group and we’ll distribute it, we’ll make that targeting problem much harder, we’ll employ some of those electromagnetic warfare techniques. … We’ll make that an extremely difficult problem for anybody who wants to do that.”

Richardson also noted that just because a coastal defense missile system is set up at a certain location doesn’t mean it’s guaranteed to succeed against the U.S. Navy.

“If you think about the chain of events that has to happen to detect, to target, to transfer that data to a weapon system, to launch that weapon system, get it up there, it does its midcourse thing, does its terminal phase thing and all of that – if you deconstruct that whole chain of events, you can kind of disrupt that at a lot of different places,” he said.

As for the Navy’s own detect-to-engage kill chain, Richardson said he hoped to see even more sensors, platforms and payloads brought into the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) construct to help create more options for commanders and also to make the system more resilient.

ddg-112.jpg

USS Michael Murphy (DDG-112) is moored at its homeport at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam

As more of these assets are tied together and able to pass fire-quality tracking information, with “so many sensors, so many platforms, so many weapons choices –and when I say weapons, I would say payloads most accurately because it may not be a kinetic missile or something, this may be an electromagnetic or a directed energy or it might be a cyber or something that we can bring to bear – you start to think of this web that emerges, or this space, and that’s I think the direction we need to head,” Richardson said.
“And then there’s a resilience that comes with that, there’s a graceful degradation and restoration that can happen in there.”

To include the maximum amount of information and create the most resilient network, Richardson – a submariner by trade – said the underwater community would have to get involved too.

“You know, submariners are just scared to death of the whole concept, but we need to bring them in so that we’ve got the benefit of all their information and their weapon systems,” he said, noting that submarines can go places undetected that surface ships cannot.
“That access leads to information, and we’ve got to plug that information into the system as well.”

Overall, he said, with planes, ships, subs, unmanned vehicles and more all tied together to support defensive and offensive operations in contested areas, “I think something like that gives anybody who wants to challenge us a heck of a lot to think about.”

CNO Richardson: Navy Needs Distributed Force Of Networked Ships, Subs To Counter A2/AD Threat - USNI News
 
.
The PDF USA members look stupid. The USA will not dominate the Japan, S. Korea, EU, even UK after nuclear/ Conventional war between China and USA . both of USA/CHN will be ruined. The US dollar and China Yuan will be rejected in the world. Russia will be the super power by its powerful nuclear military only.
So I am sure that the war will not be available in SCS. We will see.
:coffee:
 
.
Back
Top Bottom