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.

 

Japan's Blunt Stance Riles China, S. Korea

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Jay-morris
 


It's not just the Senkaku islands. They have also claimed the Spratly chain, and shot at fishermen there, other navies, etc. But hey, it's ok because the US spends so much on their military, even though we only would support Japan I'm this. Since we spend so much it's somehow our fault.


Dont get me wrong.

China should keep off Islands that dont belong to them and I hope if they do anything stupid they are kicked back.

But I cant condem them from building up a force to rival the USA because well thats China right.

I know that sounds contradicting but that how it is with me.
edit on 15-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Building up their military is one thing, and they're more than welcome to. But don't sit there going on about how they'd never start a war, or it's only defensive. You don't build submarines, carriers, and long range bombers to defend yourself.
edit on 7/15/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Building up their military is one thing, and they're more than welcome to. But don't suit there going on about how they'd never start a war, or it's only defensive. You don't build submarines, carriers, and long range bombers to defend yourself.


No but why does the USA build it?

Its a bit of a double standard to allow the USA to do the same but deny China.

Now China have as YET to show that they would be a threat to world peace. To be honnest there track record is abit better than the USA this last decade and abit.

I dont trust China dont get me wrong. But if the USA has 10 Aircraft carries long range bombers ect then quite frankly I cant blame another country for wanting them too if just to "balance" the tables.

Now if China missuse them then I would be inclined to change my opinion. Though to be honnest siezing a few contested Island though wrong would be a tad better than Invading 2 middle eastern countrys because the President and his Chums (IE Tony Blair) feel like it.
edit on 15-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Where did I say they couldn't? You should read more carefully. I said you don't build them for defense.

A carrier is for power projection. That's about the pinky use for itty militarily. A sub is used to attack shipping away from your shores, such as supply lines. Long range bombers are for bombing targets in other countries. All related to power projection, not a defensive force.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by chisisiCoptos
 


So the japss like blunts...so do I ...



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Where did I say they couldn't? You should read more carefully. I said you don't build them for defense.

A carrier is for power projection. That's about the pinky use for itty militarily. A sub is used to attack shipping away from your shores, such as supply lines. Long range bombers are for bombing targets in other countries. All related to power projection, not a defensive force.


No I do agree and yes I think China want to project power. They want at least equal influance to the USA.

If every US Carrier groups has a Chinese carrier group following it would certainly reduce the USA clout or at least restrict what they do.

What I dont want to do is see is the Chinese overtake the USA cause then we just go back to the same problem
one country haveing all the power and being able to do what the hell it wants.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arnie123

Originally posted by Jay-morris

Originally posted by Arnie123
Will, article 5 seems to answer the question for us, sequestering is a big issue right now.
Lifting some of these limitations on japan would mean we can create a true Asian iron shield, one of not only defensive but offensive capabilities.
I think a military buildup by japan would be a instrumental, I am happy that at least somebody has seen what we all have seen but too damn scared to admit it that china is a huge threat for the region, there are sooooo many nations bundled up in that region is scary and with china only getting bigger and increasing its navy, its all too easy to see where this will lead up too.
If japan can pull this off, the other nations will follow its lead in this endeavor and remind china of its place and follow international law. All these little incursions that china has been doing to japan is really a test to see what it will do and by god japan is fed up with it.
I'm all for it. Rise of the red dragon? how about, Rise of the red sun.


So, chinese are a threat because they are building up their militery?
USA has the most advanced militery in the world. Does that also make
them a threat?

Yes and japan seems to think so too, hence the topic of this thread an overall discussion, please stop sleeping in class.


China have got to where they are today without war. Why would
they ruin all that? The only way china will go to war, is if they are
pushed.

In a sense you are partially right, china is one of the oldest countries in the world and for a long while ruled with an iron fist, that's how china's domain was large and secure to begin with.
The only pushing around here is china's push for regional dominance in lands that don't belong to them, the pacific will not be pushed around by them and it seems that japan is the first to step up and call them out.
--
Did you even read the article? you went straight for the anti-American bashing and pro-Chinese. If that's what you want, then by all means, but at least read the article first before you start blasting America, this has to do with japan and china with us limitations involved. We lift the limitations on japan and turn it into a military power capable of not only defensive but offensive operations.


Stop putting words in my mouth. I said western countries, including my own. This is not just about america, so get off your high horse. At least read my messages correctly before you start calling me anti american. I would also like to add that i said chinese was not perfect, far from it. I am not pro or anti any country. I am anti governments, and that is a huge differnce.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


China is a long way from being able to pull that off. And the carriers they're building are smaller, and if they stick to the Russian designs they're more cruisers capable of carrying planes. No one that operates carriers has a design that even comes close to a Nimitz or Ford class.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by crazyewok
 


China is a long way from being able to pull that off. And the carriers they're building are smaller, and if they stick to the Russian designs they're more cruisers capable of carrying planes. No one that operates carriers has a design that even comes close to a Nimitz or Ford class.


Yet.....

Im talking a few decades time.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Seeing as Japan annexed the Senkaku (Diayo) Islands from China in 1895, I don't really see how China is the bad guy in this one?

FFS, the Imperial Japanese records even have the date that they stole the islands...

By the by, the US can take a lot of the blame in this one...they promised the Chinese that they would return all of China's taken lands after WW2, but for some odd reason they gave the Senkaku Islands back to Japan...might have something to do with China being communist at the time and the recent oilfield discovery...but, the US is always right and noble...right?


Whether we agree or not, if this goes to the International Courts, in all likelihood, China will be getting the Diayo Islands back.
edit on 15-7-2013 by peck420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok
Im talking a few decades time.


2 more carriers are being built as we speak...estimated delivery is 2015.

They are planning too, or already have, laid out hulls for 2 more to be complete by 2020.

Don't be shocked if China's navy dwarfs the US navy by 2025.

12 years.

Never underestimate a country that can put more people to work building their military vehicles, then your country has people.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

Remember my age as well.We grew up believing the lies so my perception is from the Nuclear family ,not to mention I was specifically raised NOT to hurt the little guy.
I would say troops today are probably a lot more hooked into the media so they mostly know the deal.
Everyone I have spoken to so far is quite similar...in the army. Air Force are close but more laid back.They aren't as hostile to their enlistees. Marines are hardcore ,Navy,Coast Guard I don't know.
The thing is once you live and work and love some people outside ones race you have to wonder how could anyone else be so stupid as to choose bigotry. Also remember the maturity curve,there are macho gung ho warriors who define them selves in a narrow minded way.
As to the foreign policy issues I do believe they ALL see the same thing as their butts are on the line too.

edit on 15-7-2013 by cavtrooper7 because: respoke



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


No way will they meet that schedule. You don't go from building cruisers and destroyers, to building carriers in less than ten years. Even though the US doesn't have a six hundred ship Navy anymore, China has a long way to go to dwarf them, and a LOT of training to better them.
edit on 7/15/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


It's not just the Senkaku islands, it's the Spratly islands too.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Let's not forget the big banana Taiwan.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I think Japan travels a very dangerous road here. As the US is downsizing ..by planning or by willy nilly bad leadership, it's ability or even willingness to come to the full aid of Japan if they get themselves into it with China is in question, IMO and in ways it never has been before during my lifetime. We still have critical bases in Japan which commit us ..but to be 100% honest? After Benghazi? I simply don't know how far to believe Uncle Sam will go for commitments or obligations. Traditional or legal.
edit on 15-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)


Japan is absolutely correct here. It will be foolish to believe that USA will defend Japan. USA has enough problems of its own.

Trouble is increasing in middle-east where USA has a direct stake - in terms of stable supplies of oil as well as security of europe. This at a time when US military budget is declining. What is Japan expected to do? Remain an independent nation or fall to China?

Japanese are fiercely independent and rational people. I expect them to protect their nation.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by GargIndia
 

Are you crazy? OF COURSE we will.
We have bases there so when they get hit WE get hit. It's called the Pacific Fleet
Are you So disconnected as to believe that? That is WAY off base from our military doctrine.
That and we don't want them pissed at us again.



edit on 15-7-2013 by cavtrooper7 because: finished my point



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


If you want to get technical, the PLAN already dwarfs the US Navy, with over twice as many ships. However, the PLAN is a brown water navy, compared to the blue water navy of the US.

The PLAN consists of (looking at ships only, no aircraft):

4 SSBNs (3 Jin [9,000 tons] with 3 more to be comissioned, 1 Xia [7,000 tons])
7 SSNs (4 Shang [6,500 tons], 3 Han [5,000 tons])
52 SSK (1 Qing [4,700 tons] with more under construction, 8 Yuan [4,000 tons] with more under construction, 13 Song [2,250 tons], 12 Kilo imported from Russia [3,900 tons], 17 Ming [1,830 tons] being replaced)
1 Golf [3,553 tons] experimental SLBM platform
1 Heavy Aircraft Carrying Cruiser (Admiral Kuznetsov class [67,500 tons])
3 LPDs (Yuzhao [28,000 tons])
9 Type 072 LSTs [4,800 tons]
11 Type 072III LSTs (Yuting II [4,800 tons])
4 Type 072II LSTs (Yuting I [4,800 tons])
3 Type 072 LSTs (Yukan [4,170 tons])
7 Type 074A LSMs (Yubei [800 tons])
20 Type 074 LSMs (Yuhai [800 tons])
12 Type 073 LSMs (Yudao, Yudeng, Yunshu variants [1,500 tons])
30 Type 079II LSMs (Yulian [1,100 tons])
6 Type 052C Guided Missile Destroyer (Luyang II [7,000 tons])
2 Type 052B Guided Missile Destroyer (Luyang I [6,500 tons])
2 Type 051C Guided Missile Destroyer (Luzhou [7,100 tons])
1 Type 051B Guided Missile Destroyer (Luhai [6,100 tons])
4 Sovremenny Guided Missile Destroyer (Imported from Russia [7,940 tons])
2 Type 052 Guided Missile Destroyer (Luhu [4,800 tons])
9 Type 051 Destroyer (Luda [3,670 tons]) Being replaced
16 Type 054A Frigate (Jiangkai II [4,053 tons]) 4 under construction
2 Type 054 Frigate (Jiangkai I [4,300 tons])
10 Type 053H3 Frigate (Jiangwei II [2,393 tons])
4 Type 053H2G Frigate (Jiangwei I [2,393 tons])
13 Type 053 Frigate (Jianghu [2,000 tons) Being replaced
8 Type 056 Corvette (Jiangdao [1,440 tons]) 20 total to be built
6 Type 037-II Missile Boat (Houjian [520 tons])
30 Type 037-IG Missile Boat (Houxin [478 tons])
86 Type 022 Missile Boat (Houbei [220 tons]) Stealth wave-piercing catamaran hull
1 Type 918 Minelayer (Wolei [2,300 tons])
2 Type 082II Minehunter (Wozang [575 tons])
5 Type 082 Minesweeper (Wosao [320 tons])
8 Type 081 Minehunter (Wochi [600 tons])
50 Lianyun Minesweeper [400 tons]
40 Type 010 Minesweeper [590 tons] In reserve
Unk Type 312 Minesweeper Drones [45 tons]
36 Haiqing Submarine Chaser/Gunboat [478 tons]
17 Type 062I Submarine Chaser/Gunboat [170 tons]
78 Type 037 Submarine Chaser (Hainan [400 tons])
100 Type 062 Gunboat (Shanghai II [135 tons])
5 Replenishment oilers


Compare that to the US Navy:
10 CVN Aircraft Carriers (Nimitz [100,000-106,300 tons])
2+1 CVN Aircraft Carriers (Gerald Ford [101,600 tons]) Under construction
1 LHA Helicopter Landing Ship (Taraw [39,967 tons])
8 LHD Helicopter Landing Ship (Wasp [41,150 tons])
1+3 LHA Helicopter Landing Ship (America [45,700 tons]) Formerly LHA(R) under construction
2 LPD Amphibious Transport Dock (Austin [16,914 tons])
6+4+1 LPD Amphibious Landing Dock (San Antonio [24,900 tons]) 4 under construction 1 planned
8 L S D Dock Landing Ship (Whidbey Island [16,100 tons])
4 L S D Dock Landing Ship (Harpers Ferry [16,708 tons])
22 Cruisers (Ticonderoga [9,800 tons])
62+13 Destroyers (Arleigh Burke [8,315 tons Flight I, 8,400 Tons Flight II, 9,200 tons Flight IIA, 10,000 tons Flight III]) 13 more planned or under construction
3 Destroyers (Zumwalt [14,798 tons]) 3 planned or under construction
13 Frigates (Oliver Hazard Perry [4,200 tons])
2+2+16 Littoral Combat Ships (Freedom [3,000 tons]) 2 under construction 16 planned
1+1+1+6 Littoral Combat Ships (Independence [3,104 tons] 1 under construction to commission, 1 under construction 6 planned
18 SSBN Ballistic Missile Submarines (Ohio [16,764 tons])
4 SSGN Cruise Missile Submarines (Ohio [16,764 tons])
42+2 SSN Submarines (Los Angeles [6,082-6,927 tons])2 reserve
3 SSN Submarines (Seawolf [8,600-9,138 tons])
9+5+4+10 SSN Submarines (Virginia [7,900 tons]) 30 total planned
edit on 7/15/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by crazyewok
Im talking a few decades time.


2 more carriers are being built as we speak...estimated delivery is 2015.

They are planning too, or already have, laid out hulls for 2 more to be complete by 2020.

Don't be shocked if China's navy dwarfs the US navy by 2025.

12 years.

Never underestimate a country that can put more people to work building their military vehicles, then your country has people.

ummm...pearl harbor...? Yeah you should hit the books again bruh, china has a long ways away from dwarfing the US Navy in an 11 year time frame, lets be realistic here, your math actually shows it, that's 4 till 2020, leaving at least 2 more, that's a grand whopping total of 6. WOW SURE DOES DWARF THE US NAVY.
Fail.
Like another poster has said, we have gone along way from Russian designed ships and no other nation comes close to the ford or Nimitz class ships.
We also have the experience of naval warfare and contructions, can you imagine an Aegis Battlecrusier? scary.
China would have to contend with not only the US but Japans navy, both of which have the best experience in naval combat then any other nation, followed by the UK.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Arnie123
 


The largest surface ship built in China, is 28,000 tons. I'm hard pressed to believe that they can go from that, to suddenly building four aircraft carriers faster than the US can (with all the experience that the US has building carriers, having built 10 Nimitz class, 1 Enterprise class, and 1 Ford class). Even if they are going to be smaller.




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join