US: Chinas weapons exceed self-defence needs

#1
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2008012...80129060716;_ylt=ArsUvSyY6GP2PZQgfCofH3SQOrgF

The United States said Monday it was "troubling" that China's weapons systems capability exceeded the level Beijing defined as necessary for self-defence.

The head of the US armed forces in the Asia-Pacific, Admiral Timothy Keating, said he was told by Chinese leaders during a visit to Beijing that its so-called "area denial weapons" were "to protect those things that are ours".

But he said, "we find it troubling that the capabilities of some of these weapons systems would tend to exceed our own expectations for protecting those things that are 'ours'".

Keating said the United States had "intelligence that reinforces my opinion that China is developing, fielding and has in place weapons that could be characterized as having, amongst perhaps other purposes, an ability to restrict movement in and around certain areas on the sea, in the air or under the sea.
...
The Pentagon fears China's area-denial arms, including missiles, can be used to attack US aircraft carriers and ships, reports have said.
Needless to say that American militaly potential greatly exceed self-defence needs.

Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi.

Btw, I suspect that from point of view of our American friends Russia's weapons exceed self-defence needs as well.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#2
One would hope that any sensible country has weapons that exceed the need for mere self defense. The US doctrine is still that they need the capability to fight two large wars in two locations around the world at any one time, but they've only got one location with a self defence requirement - the US.

Britain, on the other hand, has barely enough forces to protect Folkestone, and has sent those forces to two different countries at the same time. Broon sincerely hopes that the big wars that everyone else is making sure they are bombed up for are going to be fought somewhere else, and that nobody will notice little old England during the fray.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#3
I may well do so. It could actually benefit from a hostile takeover.
 
#4
Or a nuke.

Omelettes and eggs.
 
#5
The existing Sino-US economic interdependance is a far better garuntee of security between the two countries than any arms control. The only problem is that the US might not be able to disengage with China economically in protest, say to agression against Taiwan, without suffering unacceptable economic consequences.

The real concern must be, firstly the threat of weapons technology proliferation to third parties and secondly that the US cannot afford to protest too strongly to China flexing it's muscles on the regional stage due to the loss in trade such action would inevitably cause.
 
#6
I would have thought it was fairer to judge a country on its deeds, not its words. Now, how many countries have the Yanks attacked since 1945, and how many has China attacked?

USA - Vietnam, lLaos, Cambodia, Grenada, Nicaragua (on the sly), Iraq, Afghanistan. And a few coups instigated here and there (Chile, Guatemala).

China - Tibet, Vietnam (brief fisticuffs), India (brief fisticuffs).

I'd trust the Chinese over Uncle Sam any day. All they want is to run their own back yard and have secure borders. The Chinese know all about the costs of a major war on your turf, unlike most Americans.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#7
codbutt said:
I would have thought it was fairer to judge a country on its deeds, not its words. Now, how many countries have the Yanks attacked since 1945, and how many has China attacked?

USA - Vietnam, lLaos, Cambodia, Grenada, Nicaragua (on the sly), Iraq, Afghanistan. And a few coups instigated here and there (Chile, Guatemala).

China - Tibet, Vietnam (brief fisticuffs), India (brief fisticuffs).

I'd trust the Chinese over Uncle Sam any day. All they want is to run their own back yard and have secure borders. The Chinese know all about the costs of a major war on your turf, unlike most Americans.
Well, that's all very well and good and all that, but if we look at the subtext, it'll be something along the lines of "Jeez Mr President, those nasty slanty-eyes could be the next major threat to ALL FREEDOM LOVING DEMOCRACIES, and it sure makes me think we need to increase the defence budget again, because you know, we are surrounded by injuns, and they look real mean sir".
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#8
Good point actually, apart from the Korea fiasco, US/China relations have never been particularly bad.
 
#9
brave-coward said:
The existing Sino-US economic interdependance is a far better garuntee of security between the two countries than any arms control. The only problem is that the US might not be able to disengage with China economically in protest, say to agression against Taiwan, without suffering unacceptable economic consequences.
These trade balance stats from 1985-2007 make staggering reading: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#2007 From a USD 6B deficit to China in 1985 to a USD 237.5B deficit at the close of 2007, and with the global economy wobbling as it is at the moment, it's not going to get any better for quite some time.

Reference the domestic problems caused by international economic disengagement, that is the bitter pill many nations refuse to swallow when it comes to rigorously obeying sanctions, so the US will be wary about stepping out of the China market because another country will fill their shoes immediately. The ‘most favoured nation’ status that the US ‘carroted’ China with for so long isn’t as much of a threat now, given the changing strategic importance of both the US and China. 10 years ago, the US was the undisputed unipolar champion – that is not the case now.
 
#10
would anyone fight for folkstone or want it :twisted:
 
#13
AndyPipkin said:
Of course, Sergey, China's huge and increasingly well equipped and technically proficient military is of no concern to Russian strategists, is it?
Russians have an increasing tendancy to blame the Chinese for their woes. The old 'Yellow Peril' mentality has reasserted itself with a vengeance, on top of the normal background xenophobia and racism.

It's not like they can actually do anything about it, though, but it's easier and more comforting to blame the 'others' than sort yourself out.
 
#15
AndyPipkin said:
Better start learning Mandarin, Sergey!

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3922071/China-s-Takeover-of-Russia.html

http://www.russiablog.org/2006/08/russias_far_east_chinas_fronti.php

China has a VERY long memory, and won't abide the 'unequal treaties' forced on them by the Czars forever.

http://www.worldpress.org/Asia/1651.cfm
Hi Andy!

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE27Ag01.html

Officially, 40,000 Chinese live more or less permanently in the Russian Far East - which stretches from the Lena River basin to the Bering Sea - but the actual figure is believed to be much higher.
As for illegal immigrants then Russia is not the UK in this respect. The Chinese in Russia are in fact rightless. If needed they they would be expelled without any setiments. Now they are usefull. But the Chinese in Russia know pretty well who is "da mastah in da haus". They are calm, hardworking, not complaining creatures.

Permanent permission to live in Russia (mereover Russian citizenship) for many is a golden dream.

Meanwhile

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article1782026.ece

Chinese students oust UK pupils from top universities

EVIDENCE that some top-ranking universities are willing to accept applicants from China and India who are less well qualified than those from the UK has emerged from a Sunday Times investigation, write Geraldine Hackett and Max Colchester.

The findings suggest that cash-strapped universities are bending the rules to admit international students who, unlike British students, pay the full £27,000 fees for an arts degree.
 
#16
Sergey, if Russia starts behaving badly towards Chinese immigrants, you can bet the Chinese giovernment will have something to say about it! Whilst you obsess about the USA, China is taking over half of Russia.
 
#17
DozyBint said:
brave-coward said:
The existing Sino-US economic interdependance is a far better garuntee of security between the two countries than any arms control. The only problem is that the US might not be able to disengage with China economically in protest, say to agression against Taiwan, without suffering unacceptable economic consequences.
These trade balance stats from 1985-2007 make staggering reading: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#2007 From a USD 6B deficit to China in 1985 to a USD 237.5B deficit at the close of 2007, and with the global economy wobbling as it is at the moment, it's not going to get any better for quite some time.

Reference the domestic problems caused by international economic disengagement, that is the bitter pill many nations refuse to swallow when it comes to rigorously obeying sanctions, so the US will be wary about stepping out of the China market because another country will fill their shoes immediately. The ‘most favoured nation’ status that the US ‘carroted’ China with for so long isn’t as much of a threat now, given the changing strategic importance of both the US and China. 10 years ago, the US was the undisputed unipolar champion – that is not the case now.
If I'm reading that right the USA sold $58 million dollars plus of stuff to the Chinise, whilst the Chinese sold $295 million dollars of stuff to the Yanks. If I was the Chinse I'd be mildly worried. I'm buying bugger all off the Yanks whilst selling them the global output of small plastic toys and trainers. Which I need to keep doing cos I need the money to pay for other things I don't want to buy off the Yanks and keep a rather large population happy without shooting all of them!!
 
#18
AndyPipkin said:
Sergey, if Russia starts behaving badly towards Chinese immigrants, you can bet the Chinese giovernment will...
not do anything except careful formal protests.

AndyPipkin said:
Whilst you obsess about the USA...
If our American friends would elect doable, realistic, intelligent government that would stop wars, instigations of "colour revolutions" and military expansion then by both hands I would vote for close cooperation because really we belong to the same civilization.

AndyPipkin said:
...China is taking over half of Russia.
maybe in dreams. But I don't believe that the Chinese even dream about it.
 
#19
Kitmarlowe said:
If I was the Chinse I'd be mildly worried.
Yes, but the US is buying Chinese products for a reason, i.e. cost, and most of those products will be luxury items, so it is not wise to assume that if the Chinese products are kept from the US market that Americans will buy more expensive equivalent products from the domestic market or imports from other countries. It's a delicate balancing act all round, but it's certainly not all on the USA's terms!
 
#20
http://www.comw.org/cmp/fulltext/iddschina.html

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) is moving toward an overall reduction and reorganization of personnel and equipment with the goal of creating a more modern and mobile army. In 2000, the total estimated personnel strength of the Chinese military is 2.5 million, of which 1.8 million are in
service with the PLA (ground forces).</
with an estimated population of 1,321,851,888 (july 2007) i would have thought it to have a sunstantially larger personnel strength than 2.5m
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads