US Seeks Vietnamese Base to Counter China

[Hulk]

This is probably my last post in this thread. I've said basically everything I wanted to discuss. Anyway, to tie up some loose ends, let me wrap things up.

1. Superior American conventional military power is useless against the asymmetric Russian strategy of relying on tactical nuclear weapons. Wherever a large American base is located near Georgia, the Russians will nuke it.

2. China will just laugh at American conventional military power on land. China is the world's premier missile power. China will launch over a thousand SRBMs, IRBMs, cruise missiles, and MLRS at major American military bases. America cannot establish a major base of operations near China's border.

Therefore, I am correct when I say that the United States is primarily a naval power in relation to China or Russia. The American leverage on China is through control of the seas near the Persian Gulf. That is why China must compromise with America. However, if China feels threatened by American military bases in India or Vietnam then military considerations take precedence over commercial interests.

If provoked by Neo-Cons, China will drive out those American bases and annex territory from host countries to create a large buffer zone.

And you keep american flag and always post pro China.

 

[Bond]

The actual problem is Bangladesh & other china related china cheerleaders think Papa China would win easily against USA or India in a war.. so with these assertion they continue to live in fool's land..

The problem is countries like Vietnam and india think that somehow the US will prevail in case of a military conflict between China and the US,no matter where it takes place. Now, that is a stupid assertion because it takes too many things for granted.

he is a false flagger chinese ashamed of his nationality... dont bother...

And you keep american flag and always post pro China.

 

[NiceGuy]

----------

Look guys, this is pretty straightforward. I'm simply explaining why no countries that border China have agreed to the establishment of U.S. military bases. It's like waving a giant red flag at the Chinese bull. China will charge the target.

Just bcz we don't like US's base in VN, that's all. When we allowed Soviet union to set her naval basen in Cam Ranh. China couldn't do Nothing.Luckily for China, USSR collapsed so soon, if not, we would let her naval base to stay in VN forever.

Stop bragging about your useless army, it's only prove how idiot you are

 

[Fireurimagination]

This is probably my last post in this thread. I've said basically everything I wanted to discuss. Anyway, to tie up some loose ends, let me wrap things up.

1. Superior American conventional military power is useless against the asymmetric Russian strategy of relying on tactical nuclear weapons. Wherever a large American base is located near Georgia, the Russians will nuke it.

2. China will just laugh at American conventional military power on land. China is the world's premier missile power. China will launch over a thousand SRBMs, IRBMs, cruise missiles, and MLRS at major American military bases. America cannot establish a major base of operations near China's border.

Therefore, I am correct when I say that the United States is primarily a naval power in relation to China or Russia. The American leverage on China is through control of the seas near the Persian Gulf. That is why China must compromise with America. However, if China feels threatened by American military bases in India or Vietnam then military considerations take precedence over commercial interests.

If provoked by Neo-Cons, China will drive out those American bases and annex territory from host countries to create a large buffer zone. This explains the lack of American military bases in India.

The Indian government is not dumb enough to hand its foreign policy over to a bunch of Neo-Cons. You never know what those crazy Neo-Cons will do. If the Neo-Cons screw things up, an one-million-strong mechanized PLA may show up on India's doorstep.

----------

@Martian why doesn't mighty China come and take South Tibet and Sikkim then?

 

[Martian2]

@Martian why doesn't mighty China come and take South Tibet and Sikkim then?

The J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter fleet isn't ready yet. Chinese casualties will be greatly minimized with a fleet of stealth fighters. China will do to India what the U.S. did to Iraq in 1989. China is aiming for 145 casualties and intend to mop the floor with your Indian military.

----------

Let's take a look at the track record of the United States.

1962 - India begged the U.S. for fighter aircraft during the 1962 Sino-Indian War. The United States said "no" twice.

2008 - Russo-Georgian War. The United States chose not to fire a cruise missile at the important Roki tunnel for transporting Russian military supplies. After Russia annexed 20% of Georgian territory, the U.S. asked Russia for a "reset."

2012 - Philippines begs U.S. for arms. The United States gave the Philippines an old World War II coast guard cutter. It took an act of Congress to double the annual military aid to the Philippines from $25 million to $50 million. $50 million can't even field a single F-16 with a full complement of weapons.

The conclusion is inescapable. If you want to antagonize China or Russia, the U.S. is willing to lend only verbal support. There will be no worthwhile military supplies or American intervention.

 

[Kesang]

The J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter fleet isn't ready yet. Chinese casualties will be greatly minimized with a fleet of stealth fighters. China will do to India what the U.S. did to Iraq in 1989. China is aiming for 145 casualties and intend to mop the floor with your Indian military.

----------

Let's take a look at the track record of the United States:

1962 - India begged the U.S. for fighter aircraft during the 1962 Sino-Indian War. The United States said "no" twice.

2008 - Russo-Georgian War. The United States chose not to fire a cruise missile at the important Roki tunnel for transporting Russian military supplies.

2012 - Philippines begs U.S. for arms. United States gave the Philippines an old World War II coast guard cutter. It took an act of Congress to double annual military aid to the Philippines from $25 million to $50 million. $50 million can't even field a single F-16.

The conclusion is inescapable. If you want to antagonize China or Russia, the U.S. is willing to lend only verbal support. There will be no worthwhile military supplies or American intervention.

LOL @ your knowledge.

 

[gambit]

This is probably my last post in this thread. I've said basically everything I wanted to discuss. Anyway, to tie up some loose ends, let me wrap things up.

1. Superior American conventional military power is useless against the asymmetric Russian strategy of relying on tactical nuclear weapons. Wherever a large American base is located near Georgia, the Russians will nuke it.

2. China will just laugh at American conventional military power on land. China is the world's premier missile power. China will launch over a thousand SRBMs, IRBMs, cruise missiles, and MLRS at major American military bases. America cannot establish a major base of operations near China's border.

The Russians learned the hard way the folly of relying on ballistic missiles to counter the much greater flexibility that non-BM forces give...

V - CRUISE MISSILES: THE OTHER AIR BREATHING THREAT

Therefore, I am correct when I say that the United States is primarily a naval power in relation to China or Russia. The American leverage on China is through control of the seas near the Persian Gulf. That is why China must compromise with America. However, if China feels threatened by American military bases in India or Vietnam then military considerations take precedence over commercial interests.

If provoked by Neo-Cons, China will drive out those American bases and annex territory from host countries to create a large buffer zone. This explains the lack of American military bases in India.

The Indian government is not dumb enough to hand its foreign policy over to a bunch of Neo-Cons. You never know what those crazy Neo-Cons will do. If the Neo-Cons screw things up, an one-million-strong mechanized PLA may show up on India's doorstep.

It explained no such thing. India was at one time a Soviet ally. But just because India is no longer an ally to a communist country, that does not mean the US can just simply move in and establish an alliance that India does not want.

China will not 'nuke' any US bases. Nuclear weapons are in a class by themselves that warrant a different mode of military thinking. Using them will sign China's death warrant.

As for somehow being a naval power is a disadvantage, humanity have always prosper the greatest around bodies of water, be it streams, rivers, or the sea. China is limited by borders on land while countries can move with near unlimited freedom on the seas. If necessary, a US-led alliance in Asia can choke China's access to the oceans. Your 'analyses' is -- as usual -- seriously flawed.

And you keep american flag and always post pro China.

If there is a conflict between US and China, he will betray US.

 

[Martian2]

LOL @ your knowledge.

If you don't want to look at history then let's look at finances.

The United States is broke. $45 billion is being cut from the annual U.S. defense budget. After sequestration kicks in next year, an additional $60 billion is being cut annually. The total is a $105 billion cut from the annual Pentagon's budget.

The United States is in no position to help anybody.

----------

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/04/u...ol-act-military-cuts-raise-concerns.html?_r=1

"The dire warnings are not coming from Mr. Graham alone. They are coming at least as loudly from Leon E. Panetta, the secretary of defense. The administration, with the assent of some Republicans like Mr. Graham, has already agreed that the Pentagon will contribute around $450 billion in deficit reduction over the next decade. Tack on $600 billion more and the impact will be debilitating, Pentagon officials say."

----------

Off-topic:

At Gambit, did you just take a cheap shot at me? These are merely intellectual discussions.

 

[Kesang]

If you don't want to look at history then let's look at finances. The United States is broke. $45 billion is being cut from the annual U.S. defense budget. After sequestration kicks in next year, an additional $60 billion is being cut annually. The total is a $105 billion cut from the annual Pentagon's budget.

Mr. Historian. Please prove the bolded part.

The J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter fleet isn't ready yet. Chinese casualties will be greatly minimized with a fleet of stealth fighters. China will do to India what the U.S. did to Iraq in 1989. China is aiming for 145 casualties and intend to mop the floor with your Indian military.

----------

Let's take a look at the track record of the United States.

1962 - India begged the U.S. for fighter aircraft during the 1962 Sino-Indian War. The United States said "no" twice.

2008 - Russo-Georgian War. The United States chose not to fire a cruise missile at the important Roki tunnel for transporting Russian military supplies. After Russia annexed 20% of Georgian territory, the U.S. asked Russia for a "reset."

2012 - Philippines begs U.S. for arms. The United States gave the Philippines an old World War II coast guard cutter. It took an act of Congress to double the annual military aid to the Philippines from $25 million to $50 million. $50 million can't even field a single F-16 with a full complement of weapons.

The conclusion is inescapable. If you want to antagonize China or Russia, the U.S. is willing to lend only verbal support. There will be no worthwhile military supplies or American intervention.

 

[Martian2]

Mr. Historian. Please prove the bolded part.

U.S. bombed Iraq with F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter-bombers.

China is developing the J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter to achieve the same capability in a future bombing of India and degradation of Indian air defenses.

Is that clear enough?

 

[gambit]

U.S. bombed Iraq with F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter-bombers.

China is developing the J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter to achieve the same capability in a future bombing of India and degradation of Indian air defenses.

Is that clear enough?

So now 'stealth' works whereas with the F-117 over Yugoslavia it was not so good.

I do not need to take 'cheap shot' at you. Your own usual inconsistency does it just fine.

 

[Bond]

Here is the official CCP fartsperson !!!!

The J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter fleet isn't ready yet. Chinese casualties will be greatly minimized with a fleet of stealth fighters. China will do to India what the U.S. did to Iraq in 1989. China is aiming for 145 casualties and intend to mop the floor with your Indian military.

----------

Let's take a look at the track record of the United States.

1962 - India begged the U.S. for fighter aircraft during the 1962 Sino-Indian War. The United States said "no" twice.

2008 - Russo-Georgian War. The United States chose not to fire a cruise missile at the important Roki tunnel for transporting Russian military supplies. After Russia annexed 20% of Georgian territory, the U.S. asked Russia for a "reset."

2012 - Philippines begs U.S. for arms. The United States gave the Philippines an old World War II coast guard cutter. It took an act of Congress to double the annual military aid to the Philippines from $25 million to $50 million. $50 million can't even field a single F-16 with a full complement of weapons.

The conclusion is inescapable. If you want to antagonize China or Russia, the U.S. is willing to lend only verbal support. There will be no worthwhile military supplies or American intervention.

 

[Kesang]

U.S. bombed Iraq with F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter-bombers.

China is developing the J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter to achieve the same capability in a future bombing of India and degradation of Indian air defenses.

Is that clear enough?

a historian who don't even know that when gulf war started talking about bombing campaign of F-117 during gulf war.

BTW. China is not only country who developing fifth generation stealth fighter.

Tu-16? China is not the only country who maintain fleet of strategic bomber. We can bomb you too.

 

[danger007]

So now 'stealth' works whereas with the F-117 over Yugoslavia it was not so good.

I do not need to take 'cheap shot' at you. Your own usual inconsistency does it just fine.

bro you don't need to respond to him...... his iq made him.a.d ......... with the counterfeit equipment that dragon will fall down with out any missile.....

 

[Martian2]

a historian who don't even know that when gulf war started talking about bombing campaign of F-117 during gulf war.

BTW. China is not only country who developing fifth generation stealth fighter.

Why are you posting a fantasy drawing of the T-50/Pak-Fa?

The real T-50/Pak-Fa has exposed metallic engine pods that are clearly not stealthy.