Until they actually win a naval battle against a capable rival, I remain unimpressed by China's naval might....
From YahooNews -- Chinese navy warship, the DDG-171 Haikou destroyer, is seen in the Gulf of Aden 2009. Chinese President Hu Jintao on Tuesday urged the navy to prepare for military combat, amid growing regional tensions over maritime disputes and a US campaign to assert itself as a Pacific power. (AFP Photo/Stephane de Sakutin)
Now I'm no expert but I know a few regular readers of TRR who are so if I'm wrong, correct me....
China might yet destroy the US economically, but they don't have a snowballs chance in hell of doing it on the high seas. They should probably stay close to home where rescue ships and freighters can find bodies in the water.
7 comments:
I'm not positive, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that we no longer have air superiority. The article stated if both the US and China both fielded all their fighter jets at once that if every single American plane launched every air-to-air missile and each missile took out a ChiCom plane IN ADDITION to a 6:1 kill death ratio in dogfights against the Chinese that we still wouldn't have enough planes to overcome their air force...
I wouldn't be so disdainful of the Chinese if I were you, Ed. America spends as much on its military as all the other countries in the world combined, yet we could not be victorious in Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, far less powerful adversaries than China.
And if we force Russia, China and Iran to link arms (pun intended), as appears inevitable, now we are looking at a real rumble!
Let's see if you say, "heh heh", at the end of that one.
Ryan, you are correct, if and only if we decide to invade China and fight them at home for some reason. They are woefully incapable of projecting force more than a couple hundred miles from the mainland. The have one carrier that is a refurbished Vietnam era boat, if not a WW2 model.
They are rumored to have an anti-carrier missile such as the French Exocet that certainly gives us pause, but seriously, if it came to that kind of shooting war, we'd take out those sites before they could fire even one.
This is posturing and saber rattling on their part, for what reason is unknown to me. They're trying to assert their hegemony in the western Pacific but nobody is buying it.
Isaac, we lost those wars through strictly political cowardice and mismanagement.
We are far more likely to succumb because of reckless financial policies than a military conflict.
Strictly speaking about the military, how can China or Russia for that matter project their forces to the US to conquer us, assuming that's what they want? I mean short of an all-out nuclear exchange?
We are at war NOW and we are not doing well. War is just lining up eye-to-eye on the field of battle and claiming victory through attrition.
We are always fairly well prepared to fight the LAST battle or war but seldom prepared for the next. Government dependency, political correctness, and the wussification of America have us ill-prepared for "war". So our national status is falling, our economy failing, the dollar soon to be supplanted as the "world's currency". The "war" is on NOW. Can you not see it?
Correction: war is NOT just lining up on the field of battle...
Yes, that's what I meant about us succumbing for economic reasons, mostly our own doing. Nobody will do it militarily. We'll go down by our own hands....Russia and China don't have to attack us physically, they can do it economically and be far more effective.
Post a Comment