China - and the dangerous drift to war in Asia

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by sunnoficarus, Mar 25, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. And why my post read
    The Chinese have set their sights on having carriers but as the article pointed out the US Navy has been operating them for just a tad longer than a year or two.

    The USS Langley, a converted collier, previously the USS Jupiter, was the first as CV-1 in 1920 quickly followed by the Ranger and Wasp which were purpose built. Some 67 aircraft carriers then followed, leading to todays fleet CV’s 68 - 77 which are still afloat. Congress has mandated a minimum fleet of 11 however it is probably down to 10 though Trump has declared his intention to boost numbers.

    Currently the U.S. Navy has 10 Nimitz class, one below the number mandated by Federal law, but was granted a waiver while it waits for the Gerald R. Ford to enter the fleet. First in its class, it has a number of new technologies including a new electric catapult system. It is presently doing sea trails prior to acceptance and commissioning.
    After successful first sea trials, future USS Gerald R. Ford prepares for what’s next
    The John F Kennedy and the Enterprise are slated to follow.

    A quick comparison of the USS Ford and the new Chinese carrier presently being built.
    Forbes Welcome

    The hugely complex art of building operating and fighting with carriers has been developed over many years by the US Navy and it will be a while before the Chinese get the hang of things, but they have certainly made it clear that they wish to join the club of Navies that operate them.
    Last edited: May 23, 2017
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 2
  2. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    Personally I think the PLA(N) will chew away at this and get there in the end, as long as people are not punished by the Party/politicians for mistakes on the learning curve. I've not read of any prangs yet, unlike the rather public Russian experience in the Med.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Not sure those would be allowed to be reported?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Given the degree of scrutiny they're given by outsiders every time they nose out of port, it's hard to imagine we wouldn't have heard of them.
  5. In which case they appear to have reigned in their top gun ‘Maverick’ manoeuvring to taking place once outside the immediate scrutiny of their Flyco and around Gwailo intruders.
  6. So are we going to hear of them if they happen or not?
  7. Another story on the South China Sea on the Beeb.

    There is a looming clash if the statments from Gen. Mattis (a.k.a Mad Dog) in Singapore and the Chinese are followed through on. If the Chinese back down, it means a loss of face, which is a major no no in the Far East.

    The link,

    US warns Beijing on South China Sea islands - BBC News
  8. If they'd maybe stopped the Filipinos militarising their artificial islands back then, the whole thing could have been headed off.

    Another opportunity missed because political advantage was more important than principle.

  9. IMHO its absurd to link or justify China's ongoing annexation and militarisation of the whole China Sea as far south as Malaysia to the Philippines's token occupation of reefs in relative close proximity to its coast.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Not every military mishap is reported. However, as pointed out, with the interest being shown, should they have a ‘oops’ moment, it probably will.

    There is a school of thought that the Chinese expansion into the S China Sea could be a long term tactical mistake.
    Why China May Have Made a Massive Mistake in the South China Sea

    And it certainly isn’t making friends in the region.
    China should curb 'unlawful, reckless' North Korea, Turnbull says
  11. If they were trying to annex the whole SCS, it certainly would be. Since they're not, it isn't. They're watching one side in a dispute having its disputed claim recognised without any independent arbitration or legal process and based solely on whose mate they are. They're taking steps to ensure they're not on the receiving end.

    We have an interest in how this is resolved. Can you think of any other nations - maybe closer to home - who justify a claim to maritime economic rights based on disputed ownership of unpopulated islands far from home?
  12. Breitbart and Fox will have a lot more pictures....

  13. I don't think any other country is aggressively seizing territory with overt military threat, based on a map that was compiled and last used in the 13th century....
  14. They're no more 'aggressively seizing' than the Filipinos are, which is the point. They have a claim, it's disputed, they've seen.other countries' disputed claims negated by unilateral actions of other disputants and have decided to play catch-up.

    On the plus side, they haven't even opened a small sausage factory in Tanganika.