Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

China now will be able to track U.S. submarines

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 7 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
This is not the first time the Chinese have compromised intell officers for classified and highly secretive information regarding a plethora of subjects, and it will certainly not hinder future ventures, nor those occuring at this very moment. What needs to be pointed out vehementy is that this is in one form an attack on US soverienty, and why these issues are never escalated to massive paranioa such as terrorism is due to mutuality; both sides spy on one another. Do you believe that U.S agents do not work in China? It would be ignorant to think otherwise.


This is very concerning when we put into facticity the amount of intell potentialy gathered by the Chinese, and that of what we publicly know of. They seem to have broked a few military tactical barriers if a war were to occur.

Luxifero




posted on Nov, 7 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   
They may be able to figure out some of the tactics used by US subs and neutralize them from this information. The one thing that I have to ask is "Track with what? It is not like the Chinese have a blue water navy. This information may be damaging in the short term but I don't see long term effects.



posted on Nov, 7 2005 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Well the Chinese may be able to track some of our submarines, but to do that you have to get close enough and sneaking up on a American fast attack boat is not an easy task....dealing with it is even harder.

Except for a Diesel sub, Im sure our sub's could hear just about anything they have in their fleet approaching....specially if its Russian. Im not worried about our Navy in a fight with the Chinese. I do think the people who got caught selling our secrets should be executed tho.

Maximu§



[edit on 053030p://111 by LA_Maximus]



posted on Nov, 7 2005 @ 05:13 PM
link   


The difference is that we've always done it on the straight and narrow.


I want you to look up your high school history teachers and go to their homes and slap them in the face.


The only thing straight and narrow about America is the rhetoric. The facts don't bear out the "Aren't we swell!" b.s. line that you're towing.



We didn't pay our people rediculously low wages, purposely continue to undervalue our currency to manipulate the markets, have absolutely no respect for copyright laws and intellectual property rights, and so on.


I think we have entirely too much respect for copyright laws and intellectual property, whatever the hell that is. If you have an idea and share it with someone, you retain sole rights to make money off of it in a supposedly free market? Nonsense.

Art is theft, invention is theft, let's just stop the hypocritical legalese-driven semantics necessary only in a society consumed by greed.

Not saying they're any better, but there it is.



There is nothing wrong with competition in the international economic market- its the cornerstone of our capitalist free economy. But what isn't fair is China's cheating and manipulation to get ahead.


Look up recent proposed changes in American textile tarriffs on imported garments. We would most assuredly call that a balancing of the scales, the Chinese would call it dishonest, and cheating to gain competetive edge.

You're saying, with conviction, exactly what some Chinese guy is saying in reverse on that side of the world. They need sub tracking technology to balance out the scales and achieve parity against a superior (cheating) force.



They'll actually sell products at a loss, and it makes no difference to them because of their Communist funding.


Well, profit isn't my God, so I feel no sorrow due to this situation. I don't give a damn whether they're selling products at a loss, that's their perogative.

Only in America could someone possibly justify criminalizing charity.




What's right is right and what's wrong is wrong.


Yeah, you're right I suppose. Stealing a country from the natives is wrong. So we're wrong, they're wrong, wonderful. What now? Let's, instead of pointing fingers, take a page from Ghandi and be the change we wish to see in the world. Simple, and yet so difficult...



I'm not saying that our government is a bunch of Saints, but we've seen that China will go to great lengths to lie, cheat and steal just to get ahead in the world.


So I'd say we're pretty evenly matched. Fair enough wouldn't you say?



posted on Nov, 7 2005 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Could it be possible that the US knew they be spies for the last 15 years????

How China know for sure all the info correct? maybe they got the "wrong" info/"planted" by the US....would that not be the check-mate of the situation. When you think about it.....would be a great option t'a to lead y'r enemy the wrong way....esp. with future projects make others think y'r investing in one thing while the US secretly spend on something else.

Just an outsiders view....(knowing nothing about army matters).

Y'r Canadian friend,
Sven



posted on Nov, 8 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Saw this today, so much for the spying just being all about 'the other guy', huh?
What the hell do they manage to spend $44billions on, eh?

As big a case for some proper public accountability if ever there was. -


New York Times News Service
WASHINGTON — In an apparent slip, a top U.S. intelligence official has revealed at a public conference what has long been secret: the amount of money the nation spends on its spy agencies.
At an intelligence conference in San Antonio last week, Mary Margaret Graham, a 27-year veteran of the CIA and now the deputy director of national intelligence for collection, said the annual intelligence budget was $44 billion.

deseretnews.com...



posted on Nov, 8 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Me thinks a large part of that annual intelligence is sucked up in technical means ie satellites,Elint etc and a much smaller part actually in Human Intelligence services.
Probably a major problem is actually having lingual personnel in the area your interested in ie SW Asia and China as well as agents on the ground.



posted on Nov, 8 2005 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Yeah possibly but consider this, China doesn't spend that much more in total than the US intel budget alone.

(Even if one takes a view that they grossly under-report their spending)

The US is said to spend arond $500 billion.

So much for all that ludicrous nonsense that they are "taking over" or "over taking", huh?


Chinese military spending is more than double the level the country admits to publicly and is growing rapidly, a defence think-tank said on Tuesday.

In its yearly assessment of global military power, the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies estimated that China spent $62.5bn on defence last year, compared with the government’s official figure of $25bn.

news.ft.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 05:19 AM
link   
Assymetrical warfare does not require China to spend the large sums of money the US does.China can concentrate on what it can do re countering US Technological expertise ie through espionage or assymetrically.Eg the US reliance on GPS for military operations and the vunerability of those satellites is one option that China could use in a potential conflict.
However i am leaning towards the opinion that at least for the next few years that China will be looking inward as its economy expands and its citizens demand more and more democracy.



posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by bmdefiant
Assymetrical warfare does not require China to spend the large sums of money the US does.China can concentrate on what it can do re countering US Technological expertise ie through espionage or assymetrically.Eg the US reliance on GPS for military operations and the vunerability of those satellites is one option that China could use in a potential conflict.


- I get the idea of asymmetry and I can relate to it's relevance in confined theatres.

But when you are talking about a difference of a magnitude of almost 10 I think the concept just loses all credibility (especially as the US miltary is absolutely aligned to the idea of fighting just about anywhere in the world but continental North America).


However i am leaning towards the opinion that at least for the next few years that China will be looking inward as its economy expands and its citizens demand more and more democracy.


- This I really don't get.

When has China ever seriously been interested in going beyond her borders (the 2 obvious disputes with territory she considers hers apart)?

Even her attempt at intervention for 'peace-keeping' in Vietnam/Cambodia ended up a horrendous disaster they were ony too happy to withdraw from as quickly as possible and go home.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join