Support NeoGAF

[Vieo]

I hate the term game-changer.

I'm not a fan of "saber rattling" either.

 

[numble]

All these China v. Taiwan scenarios are about 8 years late. The relations across the straits have improved. The KMT, one of the Taiwanese political parties that visited the Communist Party in 2005 is in power, and the two sides just signed a major trade agreement. Not that all things are exactly roses and peaches, but signs do not point toward tensions increasing across the straits.

 

[Srider]

Look at it this way, for the majority of the people on earth, the US carriers are the threat that needs to be deterred.

Now there is a deterrent and balance is now in place. No one is going to attack anyone.

 

[PflargBlarg]

O look, here comes the tards with "lol, we'll nuke em' boyz!"

Nuclear weapons are an absolute last resort seeing as how they have to the potential to kill every living thing on earth. Also, derp, china has nuclear weapons too.

Sometimes I think you guys want a nuclear war or something.

 

[nib95]

Look at it this way, for the majority of the people on earth, the US carriers are the threat that needs to be deterred.

Now there is a deterrent and balance is now in place. No one is going to attack anyone.

Bit of a forward way to put it, but I suppose you are right. The US and Israel to many technically are the greatest threats to world peace. At least in terms of actual large scale wars and attacks that have taken place, and the questionable legality of them in many cases.

 

[quaere]

Yawn. War will never happen again between two modern powers. The rich elite pull the strings in China just as much as they do here. And war makes no economic sense.

 

[daw840]

Yawn. War will never happen again between two modern powers. The rich elite pull the strings in China just as much as they do here. And war makes no economic sense.

Actually, um, yeah, but.....it kind of does as long as you are winning said war.

 

[numble]

Actually, um, yeah, but.....it kind of does as long as you are winning said war.

How does war make economic sense between China and the US?

 

[daw840]

How does war make economic sense between China and the US?

Well, if we win we can tell them to fuck off with all that money we owe them!!

 

[numble]

Well, if we win we can tell them to fuck off with all that money we owe them!!

And how does that make economic sense?

 

[Escape Goat]

Well, if we win we can tell them to fuck off with all that money we owe them!!

Hmm, destroying our second largest trade partner doesn't sound too good.

 

[Saiyar]

Carriers have been outdated for a while now. You don't even need fancy missiles, just enough small planes and boats.

 

[Quadrangulum]

All these China v. Taiwan scenarios are about 8 years late. The relations across the straits have improved. The KMT, one of the Taiwanese political parties that visited the Communist Party in 2005 is in power, and the two sides just signed a major trade agreement. Not that all things are exactly roses and peaches, but signs do not point toward tensions increasing across the straits.

The KMT lost quite decisively in the midterms earlier this year.

 

[MC Safety]

World needs a Green Lantern. Shut this shit down.

Not if the missiles are yellow.

 

[numble]

The KMT lost quite decisively in the midterms earlier this year.

Are you talking about the elections in February when only 4 seats were up, with the DPP winning 3?

The KMT still has like 74 seats in the legislature versus 33 by the DPP, more than double, and a far cry from 2001, when the DPP had 87 seats total and a ruling majority, and relations with China were pretty tense.

 

[Quadrangulum]

Are you talking about the elections in February when only 4 seats were up, with the DPP winning 3?

The KMT still has like 74 seats in the legislature versus 33 by the DPP, still a far cry from 2001, when the DPP had 87 seats total, and relations with China were pretty tense.

Didn't those seats represent traditionally blue and high population areas?

Anyways, you clearly know a lot more about this than I do but I'm just sharing some pieces of the doom and gloom I hear off of my grandmother's television when I happen to be paying attention so this is very much a learning experience for me. :lol

 

[GillianSeed79]

China owns about half our debt. They could annex Kansas tommorow if they wanted to.

 

[Megadragon15]

China owns about half our debt. They could annex Kansas tommorow if they wanted to.

They should annex Texas. That would be hilarious.

 

[numble]

They should annex Texas. That would be hilarious.

They're already starting to get Texans ready:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/24/AR2010042402492.html

 

[Kuro Madoushi]

Well, if we win we can tell them to fuck off with all that money we owe them!!

:lol

Should I go declare war on my bank then?

Oh and numble! Stop being so OBTUSE! Goddamn it! People here need SIMPLE EMOTIONAL answers with NO research or fact-checking whatsoever! It's easier for them to understand!

 

[Clockblockers]

China owns about half our debt. They could annex Kansas tommorow if they wanted to.

Even with all the debt America is a immensely wealthy country. The debt China owns isn't a huge problem right now; it may be in the future, but right now it's not a huge deal.

Anyway, the more America and China trade the better, it helps to keep the lines of dialogue open.

 

[numble]

Didn't those seats represent traditionally blue and high population areas?

Anyways, you clearly know a lot more about this than I do but I'm just sharing some pieces of the doom and gloom I hear off of my grandmother's television when I happen to be paying attention so this is very much a learning experience for me. :lol

Heh, I actually don't know as much as I used to about local Taiwan stuff. Even if things do go DPP/Green, I don't think it will get as crazy as it got earlier in the decade and in the late 90s, with the US sending a carrier fleet over during elections, which was my major point. I think most people are voting based on approval of domestic governance and anti-corruption (with the party in power always being the more corrupt party) nowadays, not so much independence vs. reunification.

 

[Kastrioti]

If China has this technology, we've already had it for 10+ years I can guarantee you that. The U.S. Military is so far ahead of everyone else it's scary.

The only reason China is announcing this is because no one in the world comes close to the naval power the U.S. has, and that includes carriers. This is just China trying to strike fear in Taiwan, who the U.S. will defend in any situation.

 

[industrian]

If China ever re-takes Taiwan it'll be through economic means, not military. Anyone who thinks otherwise should put down their Tom Clancy books and use their brain for once.

 

[Xeke]

If China has this technology, we've already had it for 10+ years I can guarantee you that. The U.S. Military is so far ahead of everyone else it's scary.

The only reason China is announcing this is because no one in the world comes close to the naval power the U.S. has, and that includes carriers. This is just China trying to strike fear in Taiwan, who the U.S. will defend in any situation.

No army in the world comes close to the sophistication of the US Army, but that wont last forever.

 

[TacticalFox88]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The US needs to come up with a permanent solution to prevent Chinese influence.

 

[Xeke]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The US needs to come up with a permanent solution to prevent Chinese influence.

What influence? Which countries are being influenced by China? The biggest barrier to Chinese influence is their crazy as hell language.

English and Spanish, German, Italian, and French have enough in common with nearly the same alphabet and lots of very similar pronunciation, but Chinese is a totally different beast entirely.

 

[Alex Connolly]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The US needs to come up with a permanent solution to prevent Chinese influence.

We've got a geopolitical scientist of the highest order here. What the fuck are you trying to peddle here, McCarthy?

 

[TacticalFox88]

What influence? Which countries are being influenced by China? The biggest barrier to Chinese influence is their crazy as hell language.

English and Spanish, German, Italian, and French have enough in common with nearly the same alphabet and lots of very similar pronunciation, but Chinese is a totally different beast entirely.

China simply wants to take the US's position as the worlds dominant economic, political, and military power. Why do you think they've been trying so hard trading, and trying to make their economy as strong as it possibly can?

 

[numble]

Why do you think they've been trying so hard trading, and trying to make their economy as strong as it possibly can?

I agree. I really can think of no other reason why they would want to make their economy as strong as it possibly can.

 

[Xeke]

China simply wants to take the US's position as the worlds dominant economic, political, and military power. Why do you think they've been trying so hard trading, and trying to make their economy as strong as it possibly can?

Sure, but as far as I know there are no Chinese franchises like WalMart, Mcdonalds, KFC, Burger King, 7/11, Dominos that really exist in other countries.

 

[industrian]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The US needs to come up with a permanent solution to prevent Chinese influence.

I do say old chap as I have in the past: our Empire needs to come up with a permanent solution to prevent American influence.

 

[Alex Connolly]

China simply wants to take the US's position as the worlds dominant economic, political, and military power. Why do you think they've been trying so hard trading, and trying to make their economy as strong as it possibly can?

Ever think about the domestic requirements for having the world's biggest population!? Considered the need to future-proof a country so there isn't an economic collapse?!

Seriously, take the advice of Industrian - put down the Clancy novels. Incidentally, even at the height of its most powerful dynasties, when has China made a concerted effort to invade any other countries? It certainly has the manpower, and has had for thousands of years. It's had some of the most ingenious warfare tacticians in history.

Its Confucian roots and notions of stability, the name of the country itself "Zhongguo" meaning middle kingdom and referring to it being the center of the world...everything culturally and politically points to preference of internal solidification and, outside of that, a knack for trading and economic development.

Sure, if provoked, any country has the right to defend itself, but to think the development of an anti-ship missile in the absence of a naval force of any note is declaration of intent to conflict...then the States is guilty of a lot more.

 

[Srider]

What influence? Which countries are being influenced by China? The biggest barrier to Chinese influence is their crazy as hell language.

English and Spanish, German, Italian, and French have enough in common with nearly the same alphabet and lots of very similar pronunciation, but Chinese is a totally different beast entirely.

What influence? Wow, even if the only thing you do is read GAF all day, someone needs to be living in 2010.

 

[BigSicily]

Basically it boils down to this:

China gets this thing done. Now it opens them up to go after Taiwan. China tells the US, back off, this isn't your turf, mind your business. The US dispatches carriers to support Taiwan. China has the ability to stop those carriers dead in the tracks. They didn't use atomic weapons so the US won't respond with atomic weapons. In the meantime, Taiwan is done and is now again part of China.

IMHO, it boils down to a lot of silly rhetoric -- some of which are yours. In reality, China will never get across the straits. Comments like this one are just silly:

"China can reach out and hit the U.S. well before the U.S. can get close enough to the mainland to hit back," said Toshi Yoshihara, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College. He said U.S. ships have only twice been that vulnerable — against Japan in World War II and against Soviet bombers in the Cold War.

Nobody is going to drive a Nimitz CVN group into the Yellow Sea on day 1. This reminds me of the Lehman doctine. Yet, ramming a CVN task force into the Sea of Okhotsk, during WW3, to fight it out with SSBNs emerging from their bases actually makes some sense.

If we're having a serious conversation... If China provokes a war, anyone within a few hundred miles of the coast better move the fuck out because the tomahawks and CALCMs are going to fly. After the strategic weapons platforms (B-2*, B-1b, B-52, SSN, SSGNs, etc) are used to make some rubble, the CVNs off Taiwan can move closer and just deal with the remaining mobile systems that China has.

*Note the B-2 design, arguably the far and away most advanced, is 30 years old. A point I made in another thread here, 'stealth'/LO is a function of computing power which has increased dramatically since then; the designs *we've seen* since aren't strategic weapons and they have other compromises (Maybe the BirdofPray is closest). Who knows that they'll pull out of their asses.

"America's virtually invincible carrier fleet"? I thought that the Russians still had plenty of supersonic bombers with carrier killing missiles?

In truth, the whole SU-33s, blah, blah, firing mach 3+ SS-N-22 Sunburns are more effective as fodder for internet dick measuring than they would be in real life.

Hey the world is over! Yay! There wont ever be a conventional war between major powers.

Not a believer in limited exchanges?

 

[Lazy vs Crazy]

If China has this technology, we've already had it for 10+ years I can guarantee you that. .

Great it will work wonders against all those carriers China doesn't have.

I mean what? How is this at all relevant to anything? It's just dick waving.

 

[J-Rzez]

I'm not sure how these missiles would stack up to a carrier's defense layers as is even. Considering each carrier is fully supported by not only offensive, but defensive ships, as well as aircraft, it'd be quite a feat to hit one of them. The destructive power of these missiles must be immense though, to be able to take out a carrier. You'd have to fully breach the hull with enough damage that the carriers own anti-flooding systems wouldn't be able to contain the water.

You have to always remember though, who knows what real offensive and defensive technologies the US has by now. Since WWII the US has been doing so many top secret programs it's scary. Remember, the US was using/tinkering with F-117's nearly 2 to 3 decades before we first got wind about them, for one example. We only a few years ago heard about the Raptors and JSFs. We're only now hearing about unmanned weaponries. Hell they just announced how they've been investing in anti-missile aircraft that utilize lasers to neutralize threats.

Who knows what is lurking in the shadows.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

In truth, the whole SU-33s, blah, blah, firing mach 3+ SS-N-22 Sunburns are more effective as fodder for internet dick measuring than they would be in real life.

I was thinking more like the traditional Cold War threat of Tu-22s.

 

[BigSicily]

I'm not sure how these missiles would stack up to a carrier's defense layers as is even. <snip>

The destructive power of these missiles must be immense though, to be able to take out a carrier. You'd have to fully breach the hull with enough damage that the carriers own anti-flooding systems wouldn't be able to contain the water.

It's a ballistic missile (Dong-Feng 21), so it's re-entry is going to be fast, like Mach10+ fast. There's a lot of kinetic energy on a projectile at those speeds hitting a flat deck!

I do wonder how the current AEGIS+Standard Missile3 would work. When I get a chance I may look around and see if anyone's simulated it.

I was thinking more like the traditional Cold War threat of Tu-22s.

Touche! Didn't Clancy write about Tu-22s knocking off a carrier with sunburns? Or maybe in the movie?! Cool fucking scene if I didn't imagine that.

 

[industrian]

If we're having a serious conversation...

If we're having a truly serious conversation we'd be talking about China's economic influence and not their military one. The age of warfare to extend a country's borders are behind us. The age of using economic and political interests to extend borders are here. The best example being the European Union: surrender parts of your sovereignty to join a massive free market and the richest region in the world.

The PRC is attempting to do the same with Taiwan. A few weeks ago they signed a massive trade agreement with the Taiwanese government, and a lot of folks here see it as "the beginning of the end of the Republic of China", and that it's inevitable now for them to become part of the PRC - purely for the economic benefits. Most stuff designed/produced by Taiwanese companies right now is mass-produced in mainland factories anyways, and obtaining a "SAR" status like Hong Kong and becoming part of the PRC is probably in the best interest of most moneymakers here. Taiwan would arguably become the richest, most prosperous and most important province if it were to join the PRC. But fear, pride and self-determination are strong obstacles to overcome. That and it's not as if they'd be joining a liberal democratic society like the EU of course.

 

[RumblingRosco]

I'm not sure how these missiles would stack up to a carrier's defense layers as is even. Considering each carrier is fully supported by not only offensive, but defensive ships, as well as aircraft, it'd be quite a feat to hit one of them. The destructive power of these missiles must be immense though, to be able to take out a carrier. You'd have to fully breach the hull with enough damage that the carriers own anti-flooding systems wouldn't be able to contain the water.

You have to always remember though, who knows what real offensive and defensive technologies the US has by now. Since WWII the US has been doing so many top secret programs it's scary. Remember, the US was using/tinkering with F-117's nearly 2 to 3 decades before we first got wind about them, for one example. We only a few years ago heard about the Raptors and JSFs. We're only now hearing about unmanned weaponries. Hell they just announced how they've been investing in anti-missile aircraft that utilize lasers to neutralize threats.

Who knows what is lurking in the shadows.

This is always my line of thought... I'd love to see some of these mysterious weapons and defenses the U.S. has. I'd rather not have to see them in real-world use, but a test demonstration sounds pretty awesome to me.

 

[Relix]

Time to get those EMF Bombs ready. If sonar picks up a missile unleash some kind of aimed EMS that takes down the guidance system

You can dream. =P

 

[J-Rzez]

This is always my line of thought... I'd love to see some of these mysterious weapons and defenses the U.S. has. I'd rather not have to see them in real-world use, but a test demonstration sounds pretty awesome to me.

You'll see what the US has now in basically demonstration 10-20 years from now when that tech is still superior, but vastly inferior to what they have in the black you don't know about. It's a vicious cycle.

I remember how when people in the US military were questioned about the "cloaking" tech that the British were working on saying, "yeah, it's some nice tech", meaning we probably had that 5-10 years ago, probably have it now and it works better. Who knows how much of the nations debt is actually due to black works since they bury the grunt of expenses under so many other "development technologies" platforms.

 

[Socreges]

BigSicily knows his shit. Wow.

Ultimately what matters here is the shift in the balance of power and how policy, diplomacy and such things will be rearranged in the future. As some people have mentioned, this is also very important for the simple fact that the technology might exist in the near future and one would imagine that other countries will eventually acquire it.

Sorry, guys, but I had to do this. I don't see discussions about this kind of stuff often, so I can't help but participate in this way:

You think China sinking a fleet of carriers won't start a war?

China won't ever sink a carrier. Because the U.S. wouldn't go within range if they know that the carriers are just going to get destroyed.

This affects the power balance, but probably won't ever be played out.

Also, the US doesn't want to risk their greatest flagships by having them within srtriking distance of these missiles. It takes years and a shit ton of money to build a carrier.

The whole point of this missile, as stated in the article, is to deny the US access to certain regions. That's huge.

This.

[A super carrier] is only important against countries without nuclear weapons. Total waste of money against another superpower.

That's not true.

I don't think anybody is actually afraid of North Korea.

Are you suggesting that a North Korea with anti-carrier missile capabilities is no different than one otherwise?

no superpower will ever attack or threaten another superpower. Although Russia and the U.S. came close, today is different.

Today is different. But the future will be different than today. We don't know enough about the future to speak in absolutes.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The US needs to come up with a permanent solution to prevent Chinese influence.

Genocide? What the fuck are you suggesting? :lol That sounded suspiciously similar to the "Final Solution".

What influence? Which countries are being influenced by China? The biggest barrier to Chinese influence is their crazy as hell language.

what the fuck

If we're having a truly serious conversation we'd be talking about China's economic influence and not their military one. The age of warfare to extend a country's borders are behind us. The age of using economic and political interests to extend borders are here.

Economic influence is huge. You can't ignore it. And it's always interwoven with military strategy and such.

But a conversation about China's military vis-a-vis the U.S. can most definitely be serious. I think you're more reacting to the people who speak strictly about the potential for war as if economic concerns aren't part of the equation, no?

 

[XiaNaphryz]

Touche! Didn't Clancy write about Tu-22s knocking off a carrier with sunburns? Or maybe in the movie?! Cool fucking scene if I didn't imagine that.

Red Storm Rising. The Soviets had set up a diversion with Tu-95s and AS-5 missiles, which allowed the Tu-22s to flank the fleet and launch a whole bunch of AS-6 missiles. So many that the Aegis cruisers couldn't get all of them.

 

[AlexMogil]

gentlemen we have a dong gap

 

[Kogepan]

War =/= Nuclear War


This is a conventional weapon. If they use a conventional weapon, the US policy is to return the favor using conventional weapons.

It'd be war, it wouldn't necessarily be nuclear war.



Also, the US doesn't want to risk their greatest flagships by having them within srtriking distance of these missiles. It takes years and a shit ton of money to build a carrier.

The whole point of this missile, as stated in the article, is to deny the US access to certain regions. That's huge.

chicken and egg. Maybe if the US wasn't building several carrier fleets to intimidate the rest of the world, China wouldn't have to develop missiles to counteract it.

U can't expect everyone else to bask in awe at all the toys your military has. Eventually someone is going to step up and take the challenge.

 

[TacticalFox88]

chicken and egg. Maybe if the US wasn't building several carrier fleets to intimidate the rest of the world, China wouldn't have to develop missiles to counteract it.

U can't expect everyone else to bask in awe at all the toys your military has. Eventually someone is going to step up and take the challenge.

Which is exactly why we have to bust their balls, figuratively speaking that is.

 

[goomba]

chicken and egg. Maybe if the US wasn't building several carrier fleets to intimidate the rest of the world, China wouldn't have to develop missiles to counteract it.

U can't expect everyone else to bask in awe at all the toys your military has. Eventually someone is going to step up and take the challenge.

Exactly.Funny how American's love of competition doesn't apply when applied to international relations.

 

[Pandaman]

China simply wants to take the US's position as the worlds dominant economic, political, and military power. Why do you think they've been trying so hard trading, and trying to make their economy as strong as it possibly can?

is this bad?