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.
The view from the
@USNavy
destroyer as it's cut off by a Chinese warship in the Taiwan Strait
originally posted by: shooterbrody
You think china wants an actual war?
originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: putnam6
The gulf of Tonkin is a known false flag. The Vietnam war was a disaster.
originally posted by: paraphi
originally posted by: shooterbrody
You think china wants an actual war?
China just wants to be disruptive, and perhaps engineer an incident that can make them look tough to a domestic audience. It's not just ships, China are quite happy to be dangerous in the air too.
originally posted by: Nickn3
originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: putnam6
The gulf of Tonkin is a known false flag. The Vietnam war was a disaster.
The US Military Industrial Complex made a fortune on that one, and we only lost 58,220 guy’s. Yet we paid the owners of the Michelin plantations $600 for each rubber tree we damaged, while the family of a slain Vietnamese child got no more than $120 in payout for a life. Most of the defense contractors made out like a bandit.
The Truth About Tonkin
Questions about the Gulf of Tonkin incidents have persisted for more than 40 years. But once-classified documents and tapes released in the past several years, combined with previously uncovered facts, make clear that high government officials distorted facts and deceived the American public about events that led to full U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.
President Johnson reacted to news of the attack by announcing that the U.S. Navy would continue patrols in the gulf and by sending a second destroyer, the Turner Joy, to join the Maddox. On the night of August 4 the two ships reported a second attack by torpedo boats. Although the captain of the Maddox soon cautioned that evidence for the second incident was inconclusive, Johnson and his advisers chose to believe those who insisted that a second attack had indeed taken place. The president ordered retaliatory air strikes against North Vietnamese naval bases, and he requested congressional support for a broad resolution authorizing him to take whatever action he deemed necessary to deal with future threats to U.S. forces or U.S. allies in Southeast Asia. The measure, soon dubbed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, passed the Senate and House overwhelmingly on August 7. Few who voted for the resolution were aware of the doubts concerning the second attack, and even fewer knew of the connection between the North Vietnamese attacks and U.S.-sponsored raids in the North or that the Maddox was on an intelligence mission. Although what many came to see as Johnson’s deceptions would cause problems later, the immediate result of the president’s actions was to remove Vietnam as an issue from the election campaign. In November Johnson was reelected by a landslide.
The United States enters the war
Between the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and the U.S. presidential election in November 1964, the situation in Vietnam had changed for the worse. Beginning in September, the Khanh government was succeeded by a bewildering array of cliques and coalitions, some of which stayed in power less than a month. In the countryside, even the best ARVN units seemed incapable of defeating the main forces of the Viet Cong. The communists were now deliberately targeting U.S. military personnel and bases, beginning with a mortar attack on the U.S. air base at Bien Hoa near Saigon in November.
originally posted by: sapien82
I Believe that most wars are just ways to make contractors and senators /politicians and share holders in defense a # ton of money that would otherwise be spent on schools and hospitals and programs to help the mentally ill and homeless
its theft and a good way to get rid of the young fighting age men that could easily overthrow corrupt governments
originally posted by: paraphi
originally posted by: shooterbrody
You think china wants an actual war?
China just wants to be disruptive, and perhaps engineer an incident that can make them look tough to a domestic audience. It's not just ships, China are quite happy to be dangerous in the air too.
originally posted by: JAY1980
a reply to: putnam6
You are correct but not in the way you think you are.
Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag to manufacture consent for the veitnam war. Much like every one of these stories is attempting to convince people China poses some threat to America.
The American government says a Chinese ship cut it off how do we know it wasn't the other way around? Like we are to assume the US navy always has the right of way...
This story reminds me of this....
We honestly have no business being in the waters a few hundred miles from mainland China just like China has no business conducting it's navy a few hundred miles of the coast of mainland America.
Lighthouse and naval vessel urban legend
SIGN IN TO EDIT
A large gray ship with a flat surface and tower in the middle traveling through the sea
The USS Enterprise, a large warship of the U.S. Navy
A tall red round building with a glassed-in top and a walkway around it. The ocean is visible in the distance.
A Canadian lighthouse
The lighthouse and naval vessel urban legend describes an encounter between a large naval ship and what at first appears to be another vessel, with which the ship is on a collision course. The naval vessel, usually identified as of the United States Navy and generally described as a battleship or aircraft carrier, requests that the other ship change course. The other party (generally identified as Canadian) responds that the naval vessel should change course, whereupon the captain of the naval vessel reiterates the demand, identifying himself and the ship he commands and sometimes making threats. This elicits a response worded as "I'm a lighthouse. Your call" (or similarly), a punchline which has become shorthand for the entire anecdote. It has circulated on the Internet and elsewhere in particular since a 1995 iteration that was represented as an actual transcript of such a communication released by the office of the U.S. Chief of Naval Operations. There appears to be no evidence that the event actually took place, and the account is implausible for several reasons.[1] It is thus considered an urban legend, a variation on a joke that dates to at least the 1930s,[2] sometimes referred to as "the lighthouse vs. the carrier" or "the lighthouse vs. the battleship". The U.S. Navy has a webpage debunking it,[3] although this did not stop the former U.S. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell using it as a joke in a 2008 speech.[4] Other speakers have often used it simply as a parable teaching the dangers of inflexibility and self-importance, or the need for situational awareness. In 2004 a Swedish company dramatized it in an award-winning television advertisement.[5]
originally posted by: Quintilian
a reply to: putnam6
I'm guessing the US has a different definition of the term "cut off" than the rest of the world. Just looks like a US vessel is trailing a Chinese one and about to cross their wake. If it worries them they should be more careful. Bunch of drama queens.
Looking forward to the day China establishes a naval base in Cuba and starts patrolling the Gulf of Mexico. Or perhaps they could start arming the rightful owners of Hawaii and get the US to end their illegal military occupation of the place.
There was a problem with the third Chinese aircraft carrier, the Fujian, which was launched last year - a large crack formed on its deck. This incident is a major problem for the Chinese navy, which is actively working to expand its carrier fleet.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time such problems have arisen with Chinese aircraft carriers. In 2021, a similar situation occurred with the second Chinese aircraft carrier Shandong. It also discovered a significant crack in her deck, raising serious questions about the quality of construction and use of materials.
The only exception is the first Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning, which in the past was the Soviet Varyag. With the hull of this ship, throughout all the years of operation, there were no problems, which confirms the high standards used in its original construction.
These incidents raise questions about the technical reliability and safety of China's latest aircraft carriers. Perhaps these problems are related to the rapid expansion of the Chinese fleet and the accelerated pace of building new ships. In any case, the future of the Chinese carrier fleet now does not seem so certain and, apparently, many technical problems and challenges remain to be overcome.
Подробнее на: avia-pro.net...
HONG KONG, May 5 (Reuters) - When China sailed one of its two active aircraft carriers, the Shandong, east of Taiwan last month as part of military drills surrounding the island, it was showcasing a capability that it has yet to master and could take years to perfect.
As Beijing modernizes its military, its formidable missile forces and other naval vessels, such as cutting-edge cruisers, are posing a concern for the U.S. and its allies. But it could be more than a decade before China can mount a credible carrier threat far from its shores, according to four military attaches and six defense analysts familiar with regional naval deployments.
Instead, China's carriers are more of a propaganda showpiece, with doubts about their value in a possible conflict with the U.S. over Taiwan and about whether China could protect them on longer-range missions into the Pacific and Indian oceans, the attaches and analysts told Reuters.
Instead, China's carriers are more of a propaganda showpiece, with doubts about their value in a possible conflict with the U.S. over Taiwan and about whether China could protect them on longer-range missions into the Pacific and Indian oceans, the attaches and analysts told Reuters.