Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Europe, China and the Arms Embargo:The Implications of European-Chinese Partnership

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Oh I know they are changing very rapidly indeed, I just ask for some restraint in what types, in that I mean force multipliers. Let me give you an example....


The AWACS the Israelis were selling them, this is a destabilizer in the region in a sense.

Yes the US has also shown restraint, let me give you another example, the Russians sold them Sovermeny DDG's, deadly warships indeed but nothing the US Navy can not handle.

The Taiwan government then asked for a AEGIS warship and we declined and gave them some KIDD class DDG's instead. That way there was no shift in the balance of power.

As things stand right now the Chinese can not take Taiwan, but that could change with the sell of advanced systems such as ASTER from the Europeans.

Restraint can avoid undo tensions and one side thinking that they could actually do it, I will mention Argentina here as a case in point.


Why?
Restraint can ADD to the tension, if the chinese just ask "Why?" and we give them "america asked us not to" then that would seriosly screw up US and Chinese relations even more.
What restrictions did us or the US put on argentina in terms of selling items or buying them?


Restraint.........Sell them Challengers? why would they need them? they want the electronic systems and EW warfare items, not tanks they build their own.

Challangers are regarded as one of top tanks in the world, and best armoured in the world. Who wouldnt want a tank with many advanced features in it?




posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Challangers are regarded as one of top tanks in the world, and best armoured in the world. Who wouldnt want a tank with many advanced features in it?


They already make their own, it is called a T-90 or something read about in this here forum even....


No, it is a bad idea to make them gain a better edge until the quiet down over the Spratleys and Taiwan.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
They already make their own, it is called a T-90 or something read about in this here forum even....

The T-90 and Possibly Black Eagle if they buy it are fine tanks, but haveing parts from diffrent tanks to make yours better is a great idea, it improves your tank ten fold..



No, it is a bad idea to make them gain a better edge until the quiet down over the Spratleys and Taiwan.

Who is "makeing" them do anything?
We give them a choice to buy or not, if they want weapons go ahead if not dont.

Btw they are not communist, opposite end of the spectrum in overall management....



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Btw they are not communist, opposite end of the spectrum in overall management....


What? uh ok......I didnt know they wernt communist....geez they must be ready for elections then.





As for the military, just say it, you want to make money. It would be like the US Government selling sophisticated weapons to Argentina while your fleet was sailing south in 1982.....



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
What? uh ok......I didnt know they wernt communist....geez they must be ready for elections then.

No there is no comunist countries in existance, since IMO comunism means no countries (since they do provoke segregation) and they kill people, not comunist.
They say its comunism because its damm easy to manipulate and most people twist it to suite their purpose.






As for the military, just say it, you want to make money. It would be like the US Government selling sophisticated weapons to Argentina while your fleet was sailing south in 1982.....

Ah but the UK and the US are not at war, besides you should look on your own door step....boeing....they sell the latest aerodynamics and tech to china......



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
No there is no comunist countries in existance, since IMO comunism means no countries (since they do provoke segregation) and they kill people, not comunist.They say its comunism because its damm easy to manipulate and most people twist it to suite their purpose.


You don't get it, yes China IS Communist, of this there is no doubt. They are starting capitalistic reforms but they are still communist, look at the religious persecution in that nation. If you don't think they are Communists then you need a reality check, they are the last of the big ones and they know they have to change to survive.




Originally posted by devilwasp
Ah but the UK and the US are not at war, besides you should look on your own door step....boeing....they sell the latest aerodynamics and tech to china......



A 747 is far different from electronic warfare systems m8, far different. Heck you can go buy GPS stuff on the open market but it still pales in comparison to what the DoD has.........quit making excuses.



posted on Mar, 15 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
You don't get it, yes China IS Communist, of this there is no doubt. They are starting capitalistic reforms but they are still communist, look at the religious persecution in that nation. If you don't think they are Communists then you need a reality check, they are the last of the big ones and they know they have to change to survive.

Comunism is ultimate peace, AKA NO MONEY!
The soviets werent comunist they where dictators , the chinese comunist party are dictators, read up on it...you might not like the whole idea but some ideas are great.
Its the true meaning of trade, whatever matrials you own can be traded for other materials...





A 747 is far different from electronic warfare systems m8, far different. Heck you can go buy GPS stuff on the open market but it still pales in comparison to what the DoD has.........quit making excuses.

Keeping a 747 in the air isnt simple, nethier is the high tech electronics on it which probably has more electronics in it than an F-18....IHMO.
Acording to people who have served in the RN some of the tech is really old but others are quite advanced.



posted on Mar, 15 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Keeping a 747 in the air isnt simple, nethier is the high tech electronics on it which probably has more electronics in it than an F-18....IHMO.
Acording to people who have served in the RN some of the tech is really old but others are quite advanced.


First, do you know what communism is? Of course it is dictators, at least that is how it has manifest itself for 80+ years.



As for the 747 argument, we are selling 747's all over the world, flight is not a secret, but combat systems are...........I will leave it at that.



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
First, do you know what communism is? Of course it is dictators, at least that is how it has manifest itself for 80+ years.

Yes Its what I think of the perfect unreachable goal.

Do you?

Dictators are on the right, comunism is on the left.




As for the 747 argument, we are selling 747's all over the world, flight is not a secret, but combat systems are...........I will leave it at that.

Yes you are selling 747's but aerodynamics for newer aeroplanes do drift to the military and do get quickly intergrated.



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 11:06 AM
link   
It's not just about 747's.

The 787 Dreamliner thingy is packed full of the latest composite technology, aerodynamics, construction techniques, big turbofan engine tech and the very latest in flight/engine management tech (including fly by wire) and flight computers.

To claim none of this has any potential spill over into military tech whatsoever is a leap of delusional fantasy that IMO is frankly laughable......

.....and the US just actually sold 60 of them to China.......

...... but yet it wants to cry it's eyes out about the idea of potential possible European tech-transfers of militarily useful stuff!?

Can we all spell 'hypocrisy'?




posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Yes Its what I think of the perfect unreachable goal.

Do you?

Dictators are on the right, comunism is on the left.



Hell no, communism is plain evil, it sucks the life out of the individual and suppresses religion no matter which.

It does not surprise me that you find the concept intriguing, as you are still young. That will change....

Communism IS Dictatorship or at least in every place it has manifested itself.





You two crack me up, there is a BIG difference in the technolgy in a 787 and in a Typoon for exaomple, the electronic systems are by far more complex and dangerous in the military side....


Can the Chinese use this technology in th 787 for military purposes? probably to some extent, but they have not exactly been real good at making copies...


Seems I read today that Europe is taking a second look at canceling the embargo, it seems that a little law authorizing war being passed has opened some eyes.





[edit on 16-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
there is a BIG difference in the technolgy in a 787 and in a Typoon for exaomple


- I'm not denying that, who said anything about Typhoons going to China anyway?


the electronic systems are by far more complex and dangerous in the military side....


- Maybe but the 787 systems (being the latest commercial systems out there) will certainly give them a leg-up.

It's not just the latest flight computers, its the on board radar, the communications systems (including satellite), the engine themselves (either the biggest or one of the biggest most up to date, most fuel efficient turbofan designs around), the engine management systems, fuel management systems.

Not forgetting the composite construction materials and fabrication tech.

.....in short it is one massive tech transfer.
(if not the biggest tech transfer from USA - or anybody - to China, ever)


Can the Chinese use this technology in th 787 for military purposes? probably to some extent, but they have not exactly been real good at making copies...


- You underestimate them at your peril I'd say.

The stuff that they will find the most useful they'll keep on at and eventually engineer without too much trouble I'd imagine.

The Boeing sale whichever way you look at it is a huge tech transfer.......

.... and a laughable comparison to the shipping radar some Americans have been bitching about that the French sold the Chinese (which was basically a warmed over 1970's design).


Seems I read today that Europe is taking a second look at canceling the embargo, it seems that a little law authorizing war being passed has opened some eyes.


- What, you mean China refusing to 'allow' Taiwan to declare UDI?

Where's the surprise in that?

We in Europe have no desire to help anyone out in a manner that makes us look like taking sides in this (unlike some, eh?) but many of us sympathise with the Chinese.
We in the UK wouldn't let the county of Kent leave the UK just cos the remnants of a civil war had set up there in the majority for a few decades and believed they were entitled.

Just as the US would be in similar circumstances with her territory either IMO.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Hell no, communism is plain evil, it sucks the life out of the individual and suppresses religion no matter which.

Not really, since it lets you choose what you want infact gives you the most liberties than any other party.


It does not surprise me that you find the concept intriguing, as you are still young. That will change....

I am young, but I understand the concept and I also note that it is impossible, YOU have only seen fake versions of it.


Communism IS Dictatorship or at least in every place it has manifested itself.

WHAT!
How is that?
No counties!
No money!
No military!
No war!






You two crack me up, there is a BIG difference in the technolgy in a 787 and in a Typoon for exaomple, the electronic systems are by far more complex and dangerous in the military side....

Ok, lets see 787 weighs 201.200 Kg. Typhoon 23,000 kilograms ....takes a bit more to keep that in the air.




Can the Chinese use this technology in th 787 for military purposes? probably to some extent, but they have not exactly been real good at making copies...

Very much so, advanced heavylift technology, helping them create or improve thier bomber designs.



Seems I read today that Europe is taking a second look at canceling the embargo, it seems that a little law authorizing war being passed has opened some eyes.


Opened some eyes to what?
Are they going to fly across asia and the middle east to attack us?





[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Just a new development.

The Spratley problem has being solved (hopefully) as China, Phillipines and Vietnam have recently agreed to joint-explore the field.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
Just a new development.

The Spratley problem has being solved (hopefully) as China, Phillipines and Vietnam have recently agreed to joint-explore the field.



Well that is good news indeed, but will they all share the oil?



As for the 787, let me explain something real quick, Combat systems and electronics are far and above what goes into a 787, the aeronautical engineering however is also different, 787's don't take g's, don't have to assess a combat situation, they are two different things.....



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Honestly guys! I get Edsinger to agree on some middle ground things, go away for a week, and now you are all arguing again!

Like bloody women you lot!



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
As for the 787, let me explain something real quick, Combat systems and electronics are far and above what goes into a 787, the aeronautical engineering however is also different, 787's don't take g's, don't have to assess a combat situation, they are two different things.....

A bomber doesnt need to take G's.
The heavy lift tech transfer from the 787 will help them in bomber tech...



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Combat systems and electronics are far and above what goes into a 787


- In the most advanced western airforces that is undoubtedly true.

In China's case I very much doubt it.

Considering the fuss the US made about selling Playstation 2's to China not that long ago (because of the leap in computing power they represented) I find your comments strange to say the least ed.

Mind you I noticed on another thread IBM is selling China major parts of itself so no doubt high computer tech transfer is ok with you guys now; or so it seems.


the aeronautical engineering however is also different


- I'd love to hear how giving China the details of the fabrication and engineering of the latest composite materials is 'a civillian plane only' thing!

......or the very latest largest engines; or the systems that run them efficiently.

.....and the computerised flight control systems.



787's don't take g's


- Nonsense ed. They aren't fighters but they do stress the airframe with 'g'.

They stress and load the aircraft enormously through their manoeuvres (especially at the flight certification limits) and considering the weights involved this is considerable.

(Haven't you ever seen the flight tests of the high altitude flat spin test with the 747?)


don't have to assess a combat situation, they are two different things.....


- Beyond some kind of willfull nationalistic partisan blind-spot I just don't understand why you (like many in the US) are in such obvious denial over this ed.

Why the total absense of fuss over something so obvious, hmmm?

Is it cos it was Bush and the R congress and Senete that allowed it, eh?
(or is your economy/Boeing so desparate for sales and exports you'll ignore the potential - blindingly obvious - repercussions just to make a quick buck?)

There can be no question that the sale of 60 787's represents possibly (probably) the biggest aerospace tech transfer to China ever.

The 787 might not itself make a bomber (of course not, who said it would?) but the tech in its manufacture and maintanence most certainly does.

But then again with the US alone blowing vast mountains of cash on 'defence' maybe they'll need to be able to point to the handfull of Chinese version of the 'Blackjack' that'll probably appear in the coming 10yrs.

Yellow peril, y'all; vote for the protection y'all need now y'hear!




posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 06:47 PM
link   
I do not deny that it is the transfer of some technology, but nothing to far ranging from a 747-400,

As for the fabrication, you can not reverse engineer that very well.


'g'??? This 787 couldn't take 6 'g's I would think but I can be wrong.

Here is the best way I can explain it, what makes a F-22 so damn deadly? Its not the maneuverability, as the SU-37 is probably better and more maneuverable. It is the combat systems, these the Chinese don't get.

As for the Europeans selling them weapons, I think it is a bad idea. BUT you can sell them all the new large Airbuses you want without complaint.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
I do not deny that it is the transfer of some technology, but nothing to far ranging from a 747-400,

Giveing them a long range heavy lifter is not good....just as a note...


As for the fabrication, you can not reverse engineer that very well.

Not impossible though.



'g'??? This 787 couldn't take 6 'g's I would think but I can be wrong.

Does a long range bomber NEED to do 6g's?


Here is the best way I can explain it, what makes a F-22 so damn deadly? Its not the maneuverability, as the SU-37 is probably better and more maneuverable. It is the combat systems, these the Chinese don't get.

Supercruise...stealth.....radar.....


As for the Europeans selling them weapons, I think it is a bad idea. BUT you can sell them all the new large Airbuses you want without complaint.

Why are you guys getting worried about them trying to push you too far...you have enough nukes to blow up the world several times over and enough battle forces to hold off ANY chinese attack...unless they build a super long tunnel to the centre of america....





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join