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.

 

U.S. Missiles Deployed Near China Send a Message

page: 1
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   

U.S. Missiles Deployed Near China Send a Message


news.yahoo.com

If China's satellites and spies were working properly, there was a flood of unsettling intelligence flowing into the Beijing headquarters of the Chinese Navy last week.

A new class of U.S. super weapon had suddenly surfaced nearby.

It was an Ohio-class submarine, which for decades carried only nuclear missiles targeted against the Soviet Union, and then Russia.

But this one was different: for nearly three years, the U.S. Navy has been dispatching modified "boomers" to who knows where (they do travel underwater, after all).

Four of the 18 ballistic-missile subs no longer carry nuclear-tipped Trident missiles.

Instead, they now hold up to 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, capable of hitting anything within 1,000 miles with non-nuclear warheads.
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 8-7-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]




posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   
One has to wonder how China will react to this news and how they will counteract it with regards to submarine warfare, especially countermeasures.

Just how well is China supplied with regards to submarines and countermeasures?

I know since the day I began as an ATS member, I have been watching for anyone recruiting myself, towards spying on American interests.

While I certainly have thoughts on America and how politics works, there is no way I will assist the Chinese, through any means whatsoever.

Peter Brookes on Why China Is Spying on America


One has to wonder if the Chinese buying our debt was enough for them.

Know The Difference : Conspiracy Theorists, Freedom of Information, or Spies From Another Country...

Not that the Federal Government ever had any intentions of paying that back.

Why else would the lead be found in Chinese manufacturing?

To discredit them through deniability in regards to safety.

Are the Chinese waging denial of assets through propaganda warfare?

It can only be happening at the highest and lowest levels.

Financial warfare has been happening for the last century.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


China won't do anything, China will continue its corrent policy, China bought the US, the deal is not over yet, everyone is waiting to see if the empire will start a war to avoid loosing the US, or will it slowly collapse.

This is gonna be interesting.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   
"If China's satellites were working properly." Gotta love the humor in that bit of bias.

Well...let's think about how China might react.

They might think about dusting off their procedures for shooting down a few of out key satellites or jamming them (they might even know just how because some brainiac U.S. corporate and government pukes gave them our specs a while back....you know....when they started building and programming a lot of this stuff for us). That would take care of the aiming problem. They've proved they can shoot down satellites.

They might also consider sanctioning the U.S. You know they could bring us to our knees in a few weeks by simply stopping the shipment of something simple...like batteries.

They don't need submarines. They have all the unconventional weapons they need. And again, our possibly treasonous and oh-so security minded government and corporations put those weapons right into their hands.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleSecret
 


They don't only trade with the U.S. They don't need us. They haven't needed us for some time. And beside that? It would only be a temporary interruption until the blood was mopped up, the dead buried, and the regime change was accomplished.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
she is so biased, she was like, "they dont want to develop their own stuff just steal other country's info"

ya but America with the worlds "best" intelligence agency has never done that before!!!



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by tankthinker
 


I know for a FACT there's some truth in that.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Don't under-estimate China!

www.dailymail.co.uk...


Uninvited guest: A Chinese Song Class submarine, like the one that sufaced by the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk

American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.

By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.


China cannot be trusted. They have very good technology. They are just very quiet about it.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by ohioriver
 


WOW I remember when that happened, but I hate counting the years backwards it makes me feel old. That was in 2007.

I guess we will just have to wait an see. I do worry though. First we have what is it 3 or 4? ships squared off with Iran, one with 4,000 Marines on board and now three subs pop up sending China a message.

WWIII around the corner?

I try not to go all doom and gloom, but who wouldnt come to that conclusion?



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by LittleSecret
 


They don't only trade with the U.S. They don't need us. They haven't needed us for some time. And beside that? It would only be a temporary interruption until the blood was mopped up, the dead buried, and the regime change was accomplished.



Absurd! The US equals roughly 27% of the worlds GDP. The US is Chinas single largest trading partner.

They dont need us? Au contraire, if they wish for their economy to grow, they need us more than we need them.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 


You know, I last discussed this over 6 years ago. A friend and I proved they did'nt need us then by going to the Chinese government's website and looking up their gross exports by country and calculating the real GDP from that with some friends of mine who actually knew what they were doing.

I no longer have that research and I believe China removed that information from their site, but I do remember what the conclusion was even back that long. They do not NEED us. It would hurt them temporarily but not cripple them.

They particularly don't need us if we're sending threatening messages and messing with interrupting their gas, oil, and water supplies. They can certainly do without us temporarily. And they can certainly "sanction" us either formally or informally and bring us to our knees.

I don't know what the posturing or the "message" in this OP was about exactly. There's been a lot of this going on and being flung all around the globe. So just saying, there's a lot more to this than simple military or economic might should a challenge to the world hegemony be issued. They, with their holds over us, intellectual capital, markets, money, technologically, and even militaristically in some unconventional ways are no one to be messed with.

To go on thinking that they "need" us is foolish in my opinion. Even if that were true, unrestricted war tends to change all the definitions and rules.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


The Chinese navy is in the process of developing. Right now not much.

I mean, what does China have to fear on the sea? It rules commerce and is so big that you can't really defend it with a navy. Only fools would invade.

Logical I guess.

China will probably react like it always does. We want money, not war. The'll flip us the finger, pull some economical mumbo jumbo, make our depression worse and suddenly another billion will be on our debt for the lulz. Then they'll just be like "sup".



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity


I no longer have that research and I believe China removed that information from their site, but I do remember what the conclusion was even back that long. They do not NEED us. It would hurt them temporarily but not cripple them.


If China does not grow at a certain annual percentage, China suffers the possibility of going into a steep recession/depression. If they were to lose the US (who imports the most out of any nation on earth from China) China economically would be screwed. This is fact.


They particularly don't need us if we're sending threatening messages and messing with interrupting their gas, oil, and water supplies. They can certainly do without us temporarily. And they can certainly "sanction" us either formally or informally and bring us to our knees.


Wrong again. 70-80 % of the US economy is based on internal commerce. No other large country is as independent as the US is. We would shrug off whatever sanctions China could muster up (which wouldnt amount to much). Now if we sanctioned China...or placed massive tarrifs on Chinese produced items, chinas economy goes bye-bye.

PS countries have been posturing with one another for a very long time, this is nothing new.


They, with their holds over us, intellectual capital, markets, money, technologically, and even militaristically in some unconventional ways are no one to be messed with.


This is a false presumption. China cant even hold the massive debt theyve accumulated from us without crippling their own economy. They'll also never be paid back, and they know this. So why do they buy our debt? They NEED us, and it does make for a good PR campaign against the illinformed.


To go on thinking that they "need" us is foolish in my opinion.


Which flies in the face of reality.


[edit on 8-7-2010 by West Coast]

[edit on 8-7-2010 by West Coast]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
You all have it wrong. You don't worry about those subs when you know where they are, you worry about them when you have no idea where they are.



[edit on 8-7-2010 by JIMC5499]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I think we are missing the point of sending the subs in their direction. I think it is a message for when we start a war with Iran. This is a gentle nudge to back us in our war plans or...... we are not dumb enough to stir the pot with china, but we are smart enough to send messages. I feel the Iran invasion plans picking up speed.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 

Where are your figures on their GDP and market saturation by country. I know what we found, and I've not seen anything concrete to prove otherwise since. Just speculation from people who think this would be logical. China has permeated the global market. It's an old paradigm that they need us. But I'm open to studying any concrete evidence you may have.

And aside from this? You missed a few nuances in my post about this overall "message" the U.S. is sending. China would sacrifice the U.S. market. And they'd probably wind up, either alone or in partnership with someone, as the global hegemony. The U.S. flexing its muscle to show China who's still boss is almost laughable. Like I said, they can bring us to our knees by stopping shipment of a few key essentials, never mind engaging in a "traditional" war with us.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
They dont need us? Au contraire, if they wish for their economy to grow, they need us more than we need them.


So what happens when this credit your running on runs out.

america has a zionist cancer that needs treatment and i think some americans are start to realize this and need to stand up and be countred.

China could produce atomic bombs jast as fast as GM makes cars and more than likly for about the same cost so you realy don't what to give China the Toyota treatment



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by LieBuster
 
'

That plus their cultural values are a bit different than say those of the U.S. and I think people would be surprised to find out just how little a factor our marketplace for their goods might turn out to be if push came to shove with these kinds of threats and offensive posturing or heaven forbid outright war that would affect them and their abilities to keep the goods flowing to the rest of the world and themselves.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by LieBuster

China could produce atomic bombs jast as fast as GM makes cars and more than likly for about the same cost so you realy don't what to give China the Toyota treatment


Those submarines would devastate China so badly and so quickly that they wouldn't be able to produce a crappy GM car at all. Every coal power plant in China would be destroyed and every hydro-power station would have a big hole in it. China would be dark and flooded very fast.

Those submarines would destroy Chinese ports making it impossible to import oil safely and destroy their massive maritime trade.

China can retaliate with their 80 or so intercontinental nukes (some would be intercepted) but if they did that, they would be vaporized from the face of history.

But seriously, those subs are probably a message to North Korea. China is the friend of Wall Street and the model that the increasingly tyrannical American government aspires to be.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Where are your figures on their GDP and market saturation by country.


Their GDP is still far smaller than ours by a large sum. Also, China has benefited from having their economy appear to be growing even faster than it really is, due in no small part to an appreciation of the Yuan.

As for market saturation, I am not entirely sure what you are trying to get at. As that has to do with companies saturating the market with a product. If you are asking if the US consumer market is larger than Chinas, the answer is an emphatic yes. Obviously this is not achieved by way of population, but by the growing income disparity between the two nations.

One way to measure for this is to use PPP. But that is not entirely always accurate.


I know what we found, and I've not seen anything concrete to prove otherwise since.


If you know what you found, then why do you ensist on teasing me with it?
I would like to hear what it is you found so that maybe I can get a better understanding of what your arugment is.


Just speculation from people who think this would be logical. China has permeated the global market.


Well of course they have, they are afterall an emerging market. I never said that China does not play a vital role today. Obviously China has come a long ways, and thier power has grown substantially, but they are in no position to bite the hand that feeds them.


It's an old paradigm that they need us. But I'm open to studying any concrete evidence you may have.


China will need us so long as there economy is based on exports. Until the day China imports more than they export (become a consumer based economy like many rich western nations) they will need us more than we ever needed them.

I would also be interested in hearing where you are coming from as well. If you have any studies, feel free to post them.



And aside from this? You missed a few nuances in my post about this overall "message" the U.S. is sending.


Im not sure the message has been any different than at any other point in recorded history.


China would sacrifice the U.S. market.


Then they lose about 20% of their export market. :/

That is quite substantial. Who will replace that 20%?


And they'd probably wind up, either alone or in partnership with someone, as the global hegemony.


How will they accomplish this "global hegemony?" And who will fill the large vacuum left from the largest consumer nation on the planet? (note that you do not become a consumer like the US over night, it takes several decades to build to that point.) There are not many options (if any) that would make that scenario feasible.


The U.S. flexing its muscle to show China who's still boss is almost laughable.


27% of the worlds GDP is tied up in the US, (which is virtually unchanged from the 70's 80's, etc) China is in no position to "take on" if you will, the US.


Like I said, they can bring us to our knees by stopping shipment of a few key essentials, never mind engaging in a "traditional" war with us.


Explain how this scenario would "bring us to our knees." I see no evidence that suggests that this is likely.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join