PDA

View Full Version : China targets U.S. troops with arms build up


seg
August 18, 2010, 06:40
What are the Chinese up to NOW




http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/16/china-targets-us-troops-with-arms-buildup/

martin35
August 18, 2010, 07:43
Why would they destroy the weapons systems they now finance when they can get a Sheriffs lien from Obama?

StG58Freak
August 18, 2010, 07:49
Man check out dem whitewalls:rofl:


On a more serious note. China is doing what they've always done, they are preparing for the day when they shall rule the world or make it a smoldering heap. The whole time we were worried about the Russians the Chinese were snickering.

Read Sun Tzu's Art of War, they have been using this manual since it's inception and they are using it on us, look at what they've been doing.

Thorack
August 18, 2010, 10:10
OK,

So they have Anti-Access weapons which essentially means they plan to sieze Taiwan and hold the population hostage. They think they can discourage a US aircarft carrier from being in the area with the threat of those mach 6 missles we cant stop.

Its one ups manship, if they sank a carrier they are betting we wouldnt use nukes or other escalation measures or that we wouldnt want to risk the casulties of losing a carrier. I think China owning Taiwan is a forgone conclusion with this administration.

My 2 bits

TheOtherChris
August 18, 2010, 10:56
Originally posted by StG58Freak
...China is doing what they've always done, they are preparing for the day when they shall rule the world ...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/F1JE7KZdBBU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/F1JE7KZdBBU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

seg
August 18, 2010, 15:07
Yes- Tao Te Ching, I Ching, Art of War- grass mat for a bed and rice at 2 meals.
Im figure it has something to do with the subsidy for raw material we are no longer providing and seeing how we cant make anything here in the US except maybe a flatulent Puppet for a mouth piece.
Seize the day, Pick the fruit while ripe on the vine- blah blah;)

FAL freek
August 18, 2010, 16:36
Prez shoulda given Taiwan back to Japan decades ago. Agitate the crap outta China, REALLY infuriate the Formosans (heh heh) and America would have a lot less head aches in the Western Pacific.

Forgot who but someone with the gift of foresight predicted years ago that China would lure the U.S. Navy into a showdown over Taiwan while there was internal strife in America and sink most of it. And then go to war with America. Maybe their predictions weren't that far off.

martin35
August 18, 2010, 18:10
Luring our fleet into a trap and destroying it, what might the consequences be?
Sinking one US aircraft carrier, what might the consequences be?

StG58Freak
August 18, 2010, 18:16
Originally posted by martin35
Luring our fleet into a trap and destroying it, what might the consequences be?
Sinking one US aircraft carrier, what might the consequences be?

We nuke them, but they'd nuke us right back. Anyone remember back when W was President he warned China not to attack Taiwan or we'd nuke them and China responded by saying " how many millions can you lose "

China may only have 50 nukes but thanks to Clinton and Loral they can strike anywhere inside the U.S. and do so quite accurately.

bykerhd
August 18, 2010, 18:36
With the weapons China is rumored to have now, or soon, they could effectively deny the U.S. access to Taiwan, both Koreas and Japan.

I'm not sure how much it would actually take to get the Obamites and their DemoRat Congressional allies to risk, or actually declare war. Especially against the Chinese. But , you can bet the the governments of Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are mighty concerned right now.

I could see Obummer "sacrificing" a carrier, maybe even a carrier battle group to prove how much of a "warrior" he is. And, then he would do what almost any reasonable Biden advised DemoRat would do and declare victory impossible and tuck his(ours) tail and run. All parties, except those killed, conquered, etc. would be satisfied. Especially Obummer and the Chinese. Maybe the Chinese might even continue to fund us. Till they want something else.:rolleyes:

martin35
August 18, 2010, 23:42
Obama is the leader of the "I'd rather be red than dead party", more commonly called the chicken sh*ts,, his followers are legion.

gman
August 19, 2010, 13:37
Originally posted by Thorack
OK,

So they have Anti-Access weapons which essentially means they plan to sieze Taiwan and hold the population hostage. They think they can discourage a US aircarft carrier from being in the area with the threat of those mach 6 missles we cant stop.

Its one ups manship, if they sank a carrier they are betting we wouldnt use nukes or other escalation measures or that we wouldnt want to risk the casulties of losing a carrier. I think China owning Taiwan is a forgone conclusion with this administration.

My 2 bits

If you read Victor Belenko's account of his defecture with the Foxbat, you'll see just how far off the Pentagon is when "estimating" the potential of weapons. Has anyone even seen one test? Just because they say they have it, doesn't mean they do.

But what I would be more worried about is the Chinese never signed any agreements to stop building neutron bombs. Everyone else did but them.

FAL freek
August 19, 2010, 19:04
Originally posted by gman


But what I would be more worried about is the Chinese never signed any agreements to stop building neutron bombs. Everyone else did but them. Certain former associates of the Dark Continent here will disagree with you.

Jon Frum
August 19, 2010, 19:54
Gangsta whitewalls, TV antenna in the back!

Thorack
August 20, 2010, 13:30
gman,

Your correct that just because they puff themselves up doesnt mean they are big and strong. This could be a deception plan, but heres the deal if they make Pres Obama think its risky to defend Taiwan because of political pressure then its the equivilent of them having the perfect mach 6 missle. We lose because we get scared. This administration would fold like a card table at the first sign of trouble in a new war. Taiwan as good as belongs to the Chinese.

Thorack

ggiilliiee
August 20, 2010, 15:02
cant give it back ..they supply us with the best machine tools ...WE dont make anything that good ...

china has one problem ...if they "pull the plug " on the big ole dam ...i hope they can swim .and do a reload at the same time .

FAL freek
August 20, 2010, 16:57
Another Operation Chastise? Sure they've alreay thought of that and have a contingency plan.

Heat
August 20, 2010, 21:28
We need some nuclear powered battleships, based on the older design but armored up, fast(40+knots) capable of firing LONGRANGE tacticals--maybe some vstol aircraft capabilities off the stern--and bring a couple of the older Iowa-class ships back--maybe nuke them as well so they can cruise indefinetly--its just a shame to see all that armor going to waste! I remember hearing somewhere that the Exocet missle was incapable of penetrating the armor on one of the older battlewagons--something like 12-15 inches thick at the waterline--barbettes and turrets even thicker, 18-22 inches I hear--there just HAS to be a use for all that steel!

Heat
August 20, 2010, 21:34
Originally posted by Heat
We need some nuclear powered battleships, based on the older design but armored up, fast(40+knots) capable of firing LONGRANGE tacticals--maybe some vstol aircraft capabilities off the stern--and bring a couple of the older Iowa-class ships back--maybe nuke them as well so they can cruise indefinetly--its just a shame to see all that armor going to waste! I remember hearing somewhere that the Exocet missle was incapable of penetrating the armor on one of the older battlewagons--something like 12-15 inches thick at the waterline--barbettes and turrets even thicker, 18-22 inches I hear--there just HAS to be a use for all that steel!

p.s. and we need to clone Chuck Norris

jeffrey
August 21, 2010, 00:26
Chuck Norris visited the Virgin Islands, now they're just called The Islands.

FAL freek
August 21, 2010, 23:06
Originally posted by Heat
We need some nuclear powered battleships, based on the older design but armored up, fast(40+knots) capable of firing LONGRANGE tacticals--maybe some vstol aircraft capabilities off the stern--and bring a couple of the older Iowa-class ships back--maybe nuke them as well so they can cruise indefinetly--its just a shame to see all that armor going to waste! I remember hearing somewhere that the Exocet missle was incapable of penetrating the armor on one of the older battlewagons--something like 12-15 inches thick at the waterline--barbettes and turrets even thicker, 18-22 inches I hear--there just HAS to be a use for all that steel! When the Iowas were recomissioned they took parts off the other memorialized battleships (North Carolina, Alabama, Massachusetts) cause they didn't make the parts anymore. Building such a ship today would probably make carriers look like a bargain.

BUFF
August 22, 2010, 02:43
Originally posted by FAL freek:

"When the Iowas were recomissioned they took parts off the other memorialized battleships (North Carolina, Alabama, Massachusetts) cause they didn't make the parts anymore. Building such a ship today would probably make carriers look like a bargain."

I doubt that the U.S. has the industrial capacity to cast 16 inch gun turrets any more. I don't think we could realistically reproduce the Missouri again.