Vietnam Defence Forum

[vtnsx]

What make you think I have underestimate the Liaoning for what she is ? The Liaoning is a training vessel. Her configuration is not likely up to wartime standards. Her crew is still essentially learning the uniqueness of running an aircraft carrier. Her fleet is still in the same status as her crew -- training. The Liaoning is not a credible threat.

don't blame the rookie. He's just learn how to crawl. The guy over estimated everything. He's typical and comical.

And lets not forget that Liaoning's propulsion is crap, it always navigates with several tug boats because the propulsion can fail at any time.

not to mention, Nimitz class allows the jets to recover and exit at the same time. Chinese tech is garbage, they all good at bragging.

 

[vtnsx]

Make it difficult for China to access those islands and those aircrafts will leave.

How much do you think it will cost China to maintain those garrisons ?

Take a look at the GB-Argentina war.

The HMS Conqueror was not in territorial or even familiar water, but after the Conqueror sank the Argentine cruiser Belgrano, the Argentine navy essentially confined itself to port. On the other hand, because the Royal Navy was not in territorial or familiar waters, and Argentine air forces were range limited, their respective air forces essentially stalemated each other, leaving the conflict practically sea based with advantages to the Brits since they have a superior navy.

China's naval air power is not to the Brits' and that is why the stationing of those land based aircrafts are necessary but it is also costly and those costs will be immediate, not to say anything about how much it will be in the long run assuming the generosity that China will be able to impose a peace of her own condition. But if access to those aircrafts are perceived to be difficult in the long term, the estimated combined cost of the PLAN supplying those garrisons, fueling those aircrafts, cycling troops thru, and many other items, those aircrafts will not be there for long. You do not create a garrison without a long term plan to sustain that garrison. This is not the old days where military garrisons were expected to 'live off the land', or in this case -- the sea.

For now, the ship is the main and crucial weapon for control of the SCS.

not to mention typhoons. God, these Chinese don't think. If a war break out, Chinese refueling tankers and resupply ships will get sunk by US subs. Simple.

You are very right, just recently, one corner of Fiery Cross collapsed into the sea and they had to fix it. Typhoon season just got started. The force of the waves hitting those islands are going to make sure that they'll have to keep repairing them all the time, but I'm afraid that they are willing to pay the cost of that whole adventure, at least for now while they have plenty of money and resources. For how long, we'll see.



And since they have a big advantage in surface forces that Vietnam can't possibly change, the countermeasure is subs, Vietnam needs to keep buying those.

Time will kill their resources. For now, we can speed up that process by not buying "Chinese Made goods"
Chinese still have a huge problems in their backyard. With 1.4 billion mouths to feed, technically, they are still poor. They can yap there brains off online about how rich they are but the reality is that 1,34,000,000.00 Chinese would be starved to death if they declare a war with the US. China still got to feed their inactive and active soldiers, fuel, bullets, machines, etc. It will be in the trillion dollars. Major cities in China will be under attack, including factories, power plants, railroads, airports, etc, etc. Chaos break out in those major cities. Confusion, fear, anger and frustration rushed in. It will blow a hole through China's head. Yi's head will be displayed on international TV.

1.34 billion Chinese would rather live than die in a war that has no benefit to them other than the crazy Chinese trolls that constantly trolling about how powerful they are throughout the internet.

 

[BoQ77]

Vietnam decommissioned Su-22s were brought to the Air Force / Air Defence museum in Truong Chinh road, Hanoi.

 

[Viet]

we must increase our presence at sea. the Navy must get more ships, both surface warships as well as submarines. I would wish we get EXTRA technology from Israel, enabling us to produce en mass of the missiles. Placing them on shore and ships. We could later try to develop a long range version of the EXTRA.

 

[BoQ77]

To 'protect' is to do something effective enough so that you will not have to 'defend'. The difference between the words matter in real life.

To 'defend' is when something is ALREADY under attack. It is reactive. This is when violence is the response to violence. At this point, it is either all or nothing. If you lose the fight, meaning your defenses failed, you lose that something.

To 'protect' is proactive and preemptive. You have to make it clear that something will be costly to whoever want it thru violent means. It is less costly to you, in the long run, to protect than to defend. By the time you have to defend -- fight -- you may lose more than just things but people. That is not what you want.

So how do the difference between the two words matter in real life ? The difference affects your policies, your finance, and your military posture.

An enemy do not attack unless he is confident that he WILL win. Not that he can win, but WILL win. It does not matter if he is overconfident or not. A judgement of being 'overconfident' is external, meaning that judgement is from observers. In the real fight, he may lose, but he would not know it until it is too late. Nevertheless, you cannot rely on hope but on what you can do.

You have to insert as much uncertainty as possible into everything he wants to do so that instead of being confident that he will win, he is confident that he can win. Anybody can do something. In theory, I can go to the Moon. If NASA done it, so can I. The difference is that NASA with all of its resources was confident that it will be successful, not merely can be successful.

The first item you need is sufficient resources to create that sense of uncertainty. That does not mean Viet Nam have to start a crash program of military modernization including aircraft carriers, heavy cruisers, etc. If Viet Nam have the money -- great. But financial constraints demands Viet Nam to be judicious with spending so the problem is what kind of resources should Viet Nam feasibly have in order to insert that sense of uncertainty into China's expansionist plans.

The second item you need is assessment of what can China deploy to the region to convince you, or create uncertainty into you, that you cannot resist China's moves. The latest assessment now is that China's air power is not as persistent as China's sea power. That mean any conflict, or implied conflict, in the SCS will be ship vs ship. China's air power is still sufficiently weak that it can be deterred by surface response, aka surface to air missiles (SAM). Not yet requiring direct air-air methods.

The third item you need is self assessment. What do you have at THIS time that you can use to insert that sense of uncertainty into China's thinking ? Viet Nam and the others in the region should get thru all of your heads that China is NOT interested in diplomacy regarding the SCS, of which directly affects everyone's EEZ and the Spratly Islands. If China gains control of the SCS, the Spratly Islands are gone no matter how the UN rules and all your EEZs will be violated at China's convenience. What does Viet Nam have at this time that you can use and if you do not have enough of it, can you get the same from others in an alliance ?

The reason China is going thru the diplomacy theater is that China is not yet militarily powerful enough to take the SCS by force. Uncertainty can be a two-way street and China is using that theater skillfully. Everyone likes to think everyone is rational in the sense that everyone want peaceful resolutions to disputes. But history have shown that the decision to act militarily is EQUALLY rational as the decision to resolve disputes thru diplomacy. For control of the SCS, the diplomacy theater acts are there to create hesitancy in all of you. China is not being/acting 'crazy' with her military alternative.

My opinion is that no one in the region is militarily powerful enough -- BY HIMSELF -- to either create uncertainty in China's plan or to finally fight (defend) against China's military. I have always advocated an alliance. Since the method of protection and defense will be the ship, all of your navies must band together to create that uncertainty for China. Remember, it is better to protect than to defend. That mean everyone must have increased naval presence, not just in their respective EEZs but beyond. Everyone must demonstrate to China that as a collective, you will not be intimidated. Geographically, China have a greater distance to cover and support her navy than others in the region to support theirs.

I told this forum yrs ago when I first came here that after JPN, China will be the next aggressor in Asia.

If you -- everyone -- do not defend the SCS, none of you will have any EEZs.

Thank you professor for your teachings, they are more details than Sun Tzu words.
Of course, China not only acts when they feel they have enough power, but also when the proper time comes, such as 1974, 1988 against Vietnam;

I agree, an alliance is needed.

 

[vtnsx]

we must increase our presence at sea. the Navy must get more ships, both surface warships as well as submarines. I would wish we get EXTRA technology from Israel, enabling us to produce en mass of the missiles. Placing them on shore and ships. We could later try to develop a long range version of the EXTRA.

Thank you professor for your teachings, they are more details than Sun Tzu words.
Of course, China not only acts when they feel they have enough power, but also when the proper time comes, such as 1974, 1988 against Vietnam;

I agree, an alliance is needed.

China is two face man. Chinese are messed up ppl. They supported the Vietnam war so that US doesn't move up North and affected them. Then when the war is over and Vietnam won, during the recovery mode and Vietnam struggles for food, the Chinese advanced. They failed because they are nothing but cowards.

 

[Carlosa]

Thank you professor for your teachings, they are more details than Sun Tzu words.
Of course, China not only acts when they feel they have enough power, but also when the proper time comes, such as 1974, 1988 against Vietnam;

I agree, an alliance is needed.

The only meaningful alliance that can make an actual difference is with USA, assuming that USA is willing to step in and help Vietnam which is something that remains to be seen.
Philippines doesn't have anything, so its mainly symbolic.
Malaysia is still dreaming about leveraging their "special relationship" with China.
Indonesia is trying to stay neutral although that can change in the future.
Russia is not getting involved.
Japan and India can offer support in many ways, but they are not going to get directly involved.
So in the end, when it comes to a real alliance, its only USA, if they wish.
India is a possible second option if they decide to get more involved like with basin ships in Cam Ranh, etc.

 

[gambit]

Everyone in the region is being shortsighted.

It is not fishing grounds, mineral rights, or science exploration. Those are DECOY ISSUES. Each of them, contentious as each is, can be resolved multilaterally without involving the UN or any external actor. Stop thinking about those piddly islands and start thinking like the Chinese: The South China Sea.

The internal jugular vein in your neck is only a few cm below the skin. With a knife at your neck, you can be forced to do and submit to anything.

If China control the SCS, China will have a knife at the economic jugular vein of every country that have immediate access to the SCS. China can and will exercise preferential treatments to the SCS. Immediate access lowers cost. Indirect access raises cost. What China do in the SCS will have effects as far north as South Korea and Japan. It will cost them more to sail around the Philippines to get to Viet Nam and that cost will be passed onto Viet Nam. It will also cost Viet Nam more to sail around the Philippines to get things to the US.

Not even Australia and India are immune, even though they maybe further away. Each of them have a navy powerful enough to keep China in check in the SCS, but for now, each is being equally shortsighted as the Asian countries in the region.

A protectionist US under Donald Trump + the South China Sea under Chinese control = Economic stranglehold for Asia.

 

[cochine]

SU 30 MK2 air defence division 927 will be stationar in Airbase Kep, in northerner Hanoi.

 

[Viet]

The only meaningful alliance that can make an actual difference is with USA, assuming that USA is willing to step in and help Vietnam which is something that remains to be seen.
Philippines doesn't have anything, so its mainly symbolic.
Malaysia is still dreaming about leveraging their "special relationship" with China.
Indonesia is trying to stay neutral although that can change in the future.
Russia is not getting involved.
Japan and India can offer support in many ways, but they are not going to get directly involved.
So in the end, when it comes to a real alliance, its only USA, if they wish.
India is a possible second option if they decide to get more involved like with basin ships in Cam Ranh, etc.

how about Japan, the country of the rising sun?

I believe sooner or later we have to decide when we will reach the point, realizing we are incapable to deter Chinese arrogance and aggression by conventional means and non-alliance policy. I begin to like Ms. Tomomi Inada because she does not care of political correctness. she knows, the Chinese love to play the past and justify their present actions here and there. in the south china sea and elsewhere. Japan past aggression is China excuse for everything.

 

[Carlosa]

how about Japan, the country of the rising sun?

I believe sooner or later we have to decide when we will reach the point, realizing we are incapable to deter Chinese arrogance and aggression by conventional means and non-alliance policy. I begin to like Ms. Tomomi Inada because she does not care of political correctness. she knows, the Chinese love to play the past and justify their present actions here and there. in the south china sea and elsewhere. Japan past aggression is China excuse for everything.

I did mention Japan, they can offer support, they can help here and there, but they are not going to intervene and lets not forget that they already have a full plate dealing with China because of their dispute for the Senkakus.

Everyone in the region is being shortsighted.

It is not fishing grounds, mineral rights, or science exploration. Those are DECOY ISSUES. Each of them, contentious as each is, can be resolved multilaterally without involving the UN or any external actor. Stop thinking about those piddly islands and start thinking like the Chinese: The South China Sea.

The internal jugular vein in your neck is only a few cm below the skin. With a knife at your neck, you can be forced to do and submit to anything.

If China control the SCS, China will have a knife at the economic jugular vein of every country that have immediate access to the SCS. China can and will exercise preferential treatments to the SCS. Immediate access lowers cost. Indirect access raises cost. What China do in the SCS will have effects as far north as South Korea and Japan. It will cost them more to sail around the Philippines to get to Viet Nam and that cost will be passed onto Viet Nam. It will also cost Viet Nam more to sail around the Philippines to get things to the US.

Not even Australia and India are immune, even though they maybe further away. Each of them have a navy powerful enough to keep China in check in the SCS, but for now, each is being equally shortsighted as the Asian countries in the region.

A protectionist US under Donald Trump + the South China Sea under Chinese control = Economic stranglehold for Asia.

Well, don't be so sure about the Donald, he doesn't like China, he is into protectionism in many ways, but he is for standing up to China, something that Obama is not doing much of. The problem with Trump is that is difficult to know how he actually thinks. He'll tell you one thing today and then he reverses himself the next day.

The one that definitely would be best to deal with China is Hillary. No doubt about that.

 

[BoQ77]

The only meaningful alliance that can make an actual difference is with USA, assuming that USA is willing to step in and help Vietnam which is something that remains to be seen.
Philippines doesn't have anything, so its mainly symbolic.
Malaysia is still dreaming about leveraging their "special relationship" with China.
Indonesia is trying to stay neutral although that can change in the future.
Russia is not getting involved.
Japan and India can offer support in many ways, but they are not going to get directly involved.
So in the end, when it comes to a real alliance, its only USA, if they wish.
India is a possible second option if they decide to get more involved like with basin ships in Cam Ranh, etc.

Actually, SK struggle to handle NK.
Japan and Vietnam share the same faith, that explain why Japan gave much support to Vietnam maritime security recently.
But that's one way support, because Vietnam has not enough long arm to support Japan if needed.

PH, ID, VN, MY, SG ... tried to name ASEAN as the alliance name, but it shows less potential effect in SCS security.
A Malay guy told me that Malaysia know who aggressor is but they are too scared to make any strong act to confront that.
ID and VN seem to be the most promising members of new-SEATO as both paid much attention to enrich the military capabilities. I don't know we could call ID as short sighted or not, but so far they pretend that SCS issue isn't theirs as long as the EEZ around their Natunas island untouched.

It must be a long way for PH to have a powerful Navy, Air force ...

 

[Viet]

I did mention Japan, they can offer support, they can help here and there, but they are not going to intervene and lets not forget that they already have a full plate dealing with China because of their dispute for the Senkakus.

oh I realized it. you mentioned Japan.

Fact is Japan as a resource poor island receiving most of fuel via sea routes, also relying on sea for commercial trades, must have special interest in the south china sea. if China seizes control of the south china sea, Japan´s fate is half sealed. along with Korea and Taiwan. sure, Japan has busy days by playing chicken run with the chinese around the Senkakus, but she shall be capable to deal multiple issues on multiple fronts.

Trade routes

 

[Carlosa]

Actually, SK struggle to handle NK.
Japan and Vietnam share the same faith, that explain why Japan gave much support to Vietnam maritime security recently.
But that's one way support, because Vietnam has not enough long arm to support Japan if needed.

PH, ID, VN, MY, SG ... tried to name ASEAN as the alliance name, but it shows less potential effect in SCS security.
A Malay guy told me that Malaysia know who aggressor is but they are too scared to make any strong act to confront that.
ID and VN seem to be the most promising members of new-SEATO as both paid much attention to enrich the military capabilities. I don't know we could call ID as short sighted or not, but so far they pretend that SCS issue isn't theirs as long as the EEZ around their Natunas island untouched.

It must be a long way for PH to have a powerful Navy, Air force ...

We think the same, ID is the only possible one in the future and that would only happen if the chinese start to threaten them which is very possible.

 

[gambit]

Well, don't be so sure about the Donald, he doesn't like China, he is into protectionism in many ways, but he is for standing up to China, something that Obama is not doing much of. The problem with Trump is that is difficult to know how he actually thinks. He'll tell you one thing today and then he reverses himself the next day.

The one that definitely would be best to deal with China is Hillary. No doubt about that.

I was not talking about Trump's attitude towards China.

A protectionist US will have tariffs, as the Americans say it, out the ying-yang. So guess how a Chinese controlled SCS is going to benefit China in terms of dealing with these tariffs ? Nothing to do with Trump but with how much it is going to cost doing business with the US. Smaller countries are going to pay more. The Japanese and the South Koreans can go straight across the Pacific with no harassment from the Chinese. But Viet Nam are going to be extorted by the Chinese and pay more for those tariffs. China wins.