It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are We Looking For A Fight In The South China Sea?

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

THAT was me,not Zaphod.




posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Other than S-300s, I don't think PLA has anything substantial to talk about in air defense. They also have JY-26 radar which says it can find stealth from some distance like 200kms.

They are also planning helium balloon radars which will be at the tip of the earth's atmosphere and not be easy to reach by regular airborne missiles. Can these helium goodies find stealth more easily given they will be looking down i.e. on the top of the stealth plane where it is not as much stealthy when compared to front.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

Any strikes against China would be launched from the US mainland. There isn't a need to move bombers out to the Pacific until after the first strikes are over. They'd be launching from three or four different bases, using all three bomber types.

Of course China would retaliate, that's why it's called a war. But neither side would use anything but conventional weapons.


That attack would have to be massiv and at the same time very discreet and go unnoticed by every sensor observing US Activity. Mainly from Russia and Chinese intelligence. Dont think it is possible no mater where the US plan to attack from.

The attack would have to be massiv and Instant to prevent China or Russia from retaliating. China is to big to attack enough targets at once to weaken China enough.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

No, I haven't said anything of the sort. You need to check again.

To occupy China is insane. The mongols way back in the day tried that, and got absorbed by the vastness that is China.

Occupy? Why? Destroy the infrastructure, their ability to wage war, and it's done.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7

Chinas problem in a real war is force projection. Something the Chinese dont have and what little they have now would not last long as they would be prime targets.

Secondly the US never disassembled the SOSUS nets in the Pacific nor Atlantic. An advantage China does not have.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

It's called war for a reason. No one but you has said anything about them not retaliating.

No one would see the complete launch, and even if you saw part of it, prove where they're going. The B-2 would attack the defenses, opening the way for low level B-1 strikes, while the B-52s would come after carrying every cruise missile they could.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

If I were PLA (vrs the US) then instead of "projecting the force" I would be more busy "protecting the force".

If they can protect their assets from the first few waves of cruise missile strikes then they have a chance of luring USAF assets closer to their weapons range and try to create a stalemate.

Another chance they have is to attack Taiwan and Japan and force the US to bring assets in the Pacific.

Let's keep Russia and North Korea out for a while.

My philosophy is to NOT fight a war with 3 nations on earth: US, Russia and China. It would be a mayhem for the world and its future.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7

Stealth has come a long way since the F-117. It's not as vulnerable from other angles as it once was. It's still most effective from head on, but from other angles it's still very hard to see.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks and more for F22s which have to conduct the dogfights so they have to be highly stealthy from all the angles.

Does it make more sense for Russia and China to invest more into point defense goodies that can take out cruise missiles once they are within say 10 km range rather than into intercepting Stealth at farther distances.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: criticalhit

It is the point in this instance. Chinas position is they claim jurisdiction and sovereignty over the region, which directly contradicts the treaty they signed.

Chinese actions have created the problem.

you cant use a specific country's law for your example since UNCLOS is an international "law" China agreed to abide by. Read the "law" I linked you to and compare it with China's actions.


Who the hell made us the enforcer? On what piece of paper made it our business to fight every fight on the planet for ant violation of a Law NOT absolutely NOT made by our government but rather a world body? Let alone to risk WW3 over what in the end would by the standards of any modern nation be nothing more than a property trial?

Unclos this and that bs... Laws get broken particularly MINOR ones, what authorizes the USA to act Unilaterally. Is not our very own legal system based upon the right to a trial by Jury and what gives us the right to enforce the Law? Where on paper is the USA actually the Police arm of the UN and IF the world was behind this where are the other participating police? China claims it is theirs the USA claims it isn't... GO TO COURT THEN there is NO LAW when you violate the Law yourself Two claims are made NO ONE Authorized us to do this or take action. This is no different than a property line and the neighbor believing they are in the right going on the property with a gun to make them take down a fence IN ANY, ANY, ANY court in the USA the person taking the Law into their own hands would go to Jail while the property violator would be fined and that is OUR Law, the Law of the land we live in.

Do you pull a gun when you see someone speeding? do you pull a gun when you smell marijuana? No you DO NOT. Further by our own system when new factors come into play people have a RIGHT to challenge existing law to defend themselves the Chinese absolutely would have a case here that a two bit lawyer from a TV ad could figure out that new technology makes the old law obsolete and there is no way in the world anyone wouldn't get the opportunity to make that case in any legal system in the free world.

It doesn't matter what YOU or anyone else says the interpretation of the Law is it doesn't give you the right to act. If you believe in the UN as a world body then it is ILLEGAL for the United States to act of it's on accord over a broken treaty without approval, NO ONE else has taken action, no case has actually been heard by a body of peers and there absolutely is grounds for the Chinese to challenge any ruling due to new circumstances.

More importantly if you ASKED the American people IF they wanted the United States to solely play the role as world enforcer of the UN laws overwhelmingly the answer would be NO


edit on 29-10-2015 by criticalhit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

It's called war for a reason. No one but you has said anything about them not retaliating.

No one would see the complete launch, and even if you saw part of it, prove where they're going. The B-2 would attack the defenses, opening the way for low level B-1 strikes, while the B-52s would come after carrying every cruise missile they could.


If no one knows where the launch (bombers) are heading Russia will intercept you. If you launch missiles where neither Russia or China knows where they are heading . Russia will attack you With their first strike capability. China will also be on the allert at the Instant you launch.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

We launch bombers every day and no one does anything about it. There wouldn't be anything to differentiate another training mission from a real first strike. Russia wouldn't be able to intercept them, because the routes they'd take would keep them far out of Russian reach.

Russia's ability to hit the US with anything but missiles right now is over rated. They're still in a rebuilding phase in a big way. China has no ability short of ICBMs to hit us. And if either launch missiles, wet launch and everyone loses.
edit on 10/29/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
My philosophy is to NOT fight a war with 3 nations on earth: US, Russia and China. It would be a mayhem for the world and its future.


I agree with you there, and to have both military powerhouses (China and US) ready to launch at each other is hard to comprehend.

The Japs where the worst enemy America had faced in this modern war history, China is by far more advance now than the Japs were in World War II. So it's hard to imagine how all this will play out.

Numbers don't mean a thing, it only takes one to find out the enemy's weak spot and hit on that with some good strategy and bring the house of cards come crumbling down.

Any war between, either of the three will affect us all..






edit on 29-10-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

SAME way we did Iraq.
Maybe a new weapon or 3.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit

You are ignoring the fact that over 5 trillion dollars worth of trade flows through the South China Sea, including US business. China trying to claim the area made it our business.

Who the hell made its china's business to try and claim the entire South China Sea?
edit on 29-10-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: criticalhit

You are ignoring the fact that over 5 trillion dollars worth of trade flows through the South China Sea, including US business. China trying to claim the area made it our business.

Who the hell made its china's business to try and claim the entire South China Sea?


You just admitted that the US would be starting a War and is goading one based on personal Interests only, Interests that have nothing to do with Chinese breaking a Law made by the Un and also based on a presumed fear that those Islands would be used to Impact the USA negatively when China has made no such move.

Thank You, i'm going to go knock on my neighbors door now and threaten him with a Gun because I think he might steal my car one day.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit

Not at all... nice try though.

China is trying to illegally claim jurisdiction. UNCLOS guarantees freedom of navigation - Sea and Air - and protects trade lanes, which the South China Sea is one. China attempting to claim jurisdiction is a violation and the US, and any other nation, is free to navigate in the sea and air in that area. If China attacks a vessel or aircraft under the false excuse of territorial sovereignty, then the nation attacked can invoke Chapter VII Article 51 of the UN Charter - Self defense.

China would be responsible for starting a war and not the countries lawfully operating in the area.

China cannot claim sovereign territory.
edit on 29-10-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit

No, but I like your garage so I'm putting my mailbox in and building a fence in it.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Missile bases on tiny islands?! Omg, they would be like bull's eye for aerial attack.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

China is. If Ron Paul thinks otherwise he is clueless and incapable of leading a nation.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join