What's new

America's Gift to China

This has something to do with this particular topic, how?

it has to do with this:
No. You're not getting it, its the US Pacific Mandate --- which is seeing their redistribution of their Forward Deployed Marine Corp (Expeditionary) from say Japan to Guam, Marianas, Samoa, the Philippines, etc. It is what we refer to in the Navy as an "Chain Defense" , which revolves on intersecting arms, thus creating an unbroken command and control structure and response capability. Japanese deployment of her military forces into the southern islands such as Yonaguni Islands , Ishigaki Islands, Chichijima Islands, Osagawara Islands will ultimately strengthen this so called chain defense , practically creating a Western Pacific Defense Wall.

If Article 9 is revoked we will probably move to the outer islands stringing a chain defense arc from Japan to the Philippines.

Screen Shot 2015-05-14 at 6.54.32 PM.png
 
. .
So, nothing, because that has pretty much nothing to do with the point of the post.

Chinese Navy buildup leads to more interest in the SCS by Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, the US and others.

Chinese Navy buildup leads to Japan revoking Article 9.

Japan revoking Article 9 leads will lead to the US moving to the outer islands to make room for Japan's expanding military. Japan then takes a more active role in the SCS.
 
.
... China will be closing the gap a lot faster than Americans can increase it. The obvious reason is that it's far easier to catch up than it is to go forward.
.... China has no shortage of cash, expertise, or will.
....
until you remember America is the country that can't build a HSR from SF to LA, and messed up Iraq to this day when Saddam rebuilt Iraq after 91 in half a year with no money and sanctions.
.

1. China wouldn't be invited to Rimpac ? it's the signal for American allies, US senates want to express.
2. about US motivation, they didn't move forward only to keep the gap with China. They must move forward to keep gap with all. China ICBM is better than Russian? No. China strategic bombers, fighters better than Russian? No
Subs ? No ... Name others suit your taste.
3. I doubt about statement "China has no shortage of cash, expertise" ... current budget is still shortage because the leverage still low compare to American, and the total budget is small part compare to. Even American always claim they have not enough money for their plans.
4. Hahah. HSR show the weakness of American in military rally? see their air transport system first.
Will they use railway to mobilize like China? or their air transport fleets ?
 
Last edited:
.
But seriously tho, having a JMSDF + USN combined force? No power on earth can survive our firepower.
Its just ridiculous how much firepower there is between the USN + JMSDF......
The PLAN would be totally annihilated. I can assure you that.

So you (and the lovely US of A) want to liberate us again? :usflag:
Finally, you have show your true colours. Wait, i'm wrong, you guys never hide it. :suicide:
 
.
Chinese Navy buildup leads to more interest in the SCS by Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, the US and others.

Chinese Navy buildup leads to Japan revoking Article 9.

Japan revoking Article 9 leads will lead to the US moving to the outer islands to make room for Japan's expanding military. Japan then takes a more active role in the SCS.

Look, I don't care if you want to talk about other things, hell I done it plenty of times, and this isn't exactly out of the blue, though it's not the point of my post, read it again and my responses if you don't believe me.

What I find annoying is this chest thumping, now I know others, including my country men do it too, but annoying never the less.

If you want, you can also talk about the topic and share what you think of that.
 
.
Chinese Navy buildup leads to more interest in the SCS by Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, the US and others.

Chinese Navy buildup leads to Japan revoking Article 9.

Japan revoking Article 9 leads will lead to the US moving to the outer islands to make room for Japan's expanding military. Japan then takes a more active role in the SCS.
Yes, we all know what happen to Ukraine and Georgia with those US article :D
 
.
no one survive total nuclear all out war

~period

what made you think todays' gov risking this? it would be cat chasing its tail game, endless and self repeating

Not all conflicts will be nuclear; but conventional based. No one will invade.

I thought you said no wars, and now you come in with annihilated, really.

Since there would be no wars, China can easily practice against the best in the business, the US, with essentially no consequences.

Also just the USN is an invincible force, no need to add JMSDF into everything, 11 carrier groups + none is still 11. 50 something nuclear subs + none, is still 50 something nuclear subs.


This has something to do with this particular topic, how?

Gen, I'm not trying to be mean bro, you know I like you here, we get along and we joke around. But I would be lying to you if I were to say that the JMSDF and USN don't plan for these kinds of what if scenarios. They do. And I'm sure your side does too. As you should, as we all should.

Bottom line; we don't want war, but we have to prepare. And a war against the JMSDF and USN .... Is going to be a bloody one. That's why diplomatic measures be kept , and should never be exhausted.

So you (and the lovely US of A) want to liberate us again? :usflag:
Finally, you have show your true colours. Wait, i'm wrong, you guys never hide it. :suicide:


Liberate Malaysia? Malaysia doesn't need liberating. But Japan will work with Kuala Lumpur in whatever capacity that is mutually inclusive for both of us. :)

Look, I don't care if you want to talk about other things, hell I done it plenty of times, and this isn't exactly out of the blue, though it's not the point of my post, read it again and my responses if you don't believe me.

What I find annoying is this chest thumping, now I know others, including my country men do it too, but annoying never the less.

Gen,

So what do you want to specifically discuss?

Yes, we all know what happen to Ukraine and Georgia with those US article :D


The Ukraine isn't strategically imperative for the United States or NATO, its more so a strategic interest for the Russian Federation. For a long time the Ukraine was under the Russian camp, the shear fact that the Ukraine is now aligned to the West is important because it adds another buffer zone for NATO, enabling a security perimeter to be created in case of severe exigency where hostilities begin with the Russian Federation.

Strategically and tactically speaking, Russia's seizure of Crimea was a necessary calculus. Examine the map, and you will see that the United States and NATO has been rejuvenated against a common foe. Do note how swiftly and how resolute sanctions were hurled at Russia immediately afterwards. And that is just at the diplomatic level, imagine the political economy as well as military interoperability when and if hostilities begin.

The Ukraine, for all intents and purposes, was the sacrificial lamb.
 
.
The Ukraine isn't strategically imperative for the United States or NATO, its more so a strategic interest for the Russian Federation. For a long time the Ukraine was under the Russian camp, the shear fact that the Ukraine is now aligned to the West is important because it adds another buffer zone for NATO, enabling a security perimeter to be created in case of severe exigency where hostilities begin with the Russian Federation.

Strategically and tactically speaking, Russia's seizure of Crimea was a necessary calculus. Examine the map, and you will see that the United States and NATO has been rejuvenated against a common foe. Do note how swiftly and how resolute sanctions were hurled at Russia immediately afterwards. And that is just at the diplomatic level, imagine the political economy as well as military interoperability when and if hostilities begin.

The Ukraine, for all intents and purposes, was the sacrificial lamb.

I've run into this debate before on this forum, might I interest you in a lesson in treaties, their expectations and their execution - specifically the Budapest Memorandum?

A bunch of chickens better than EU armies, says Juncker,calls again for common EU Army | Page 2
 
.
I've run into this debate before on this forum, might I interest you in a lesson in treaties, their expectations and their execution - specifically the Budapest Memorandum?

A bunch of chickens better than EU armies, says Juncker,calls again for common EU Army | Page 2


Ah very interesting. Yes I remember reading about the Budapest Memorandum, and luckily for us its interesting to see that NATO, as a multidimensional alliance system, already has various defense groups based on region. For example, your own country Norway is part of the Nordic Battle Group, which has an impressive rapid reaction force capable enough to eject Russian military operations in the Northern European theater, well long enough for the mobilization of the European Battle Groups. Second, the Ukraine can be under the protection of the Visegrad Battle Group (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary) strong enough to repulse any Russian incursion into the Central European heartland. Interestingly enough is that recently ---- Poland, Lithuania and the Ukraine ---- established their own battle group, so this further increases the VISEGRAD Battle Group's force projective capabilities.

Very interesting and very DYNAMIC---- is the happenings in NATO/ Europe as we speak.

:)
 
.
Gen, I'm not trying to be mean bro, you know I like you here, we get along and we joke around. But I would be lying to you if I were to say that the JMSDF and USN don't plan for these kinds of what if scenarios. They do. And I'm sure your side does too. As you should, as we all should.

Bottom line; we don't want war, but we have to prepare. And a war against the JMSDF and USN .... Is going to be a bloody one. That's why diplomatic measures be kept , and should never be exhausted.

Sure, we all know that. The thing with PLAN and JMSDF is that JMSDF has the definitive advantage in large surface combatants and experience, as well as being better integrated with the other services.

PLAN mean while has the advantage in number of ships, being Corvettes, or Frigates, and submarines. Now we also have the advantage with coast guards.

This effectively means in a head on encounter, JMSDF would have the advantage, but in peace time and dealing with multiple opponents, PLAN have the advantage of being able to be everywhere at once.

Having said that, of course JMSDF+USN would win, just USN would be enough to win.


Gen,

So what do you want to specifically discuss?

What do you think America patrolling or even sending planes to our islands will accomplish? Will it stop construction? Will it delay it? Will America drop a bomb if it doesn't? Even if America flys over the islands and goes within 10 meters of the islands with a ship, what do you think that could accomplish?

What do you think of my theory that Americans, and JMSDF if it chooses to partake, playing cat and mouse games with PLAN in the SCS, would that improve the capabilities of the PLAN and allow us to see what some of our problems are and look for ways to improve them. This, especially considering the changes in our operations resulting from constant scrambles we enjoy now with you guys.

What about the will to continue, do you think China will back down, do you think we will give up our claims(because of this), do you think this changes anything that will favor Philippines in a real sense like faster growth for Philippines, no growth for China, or stops China from trading, or crash Chinese market, or stops Chinese scientists from making breakthroughs, stops military industrial complex from making weapons, any thing substantial? That's not just words or temporary.
 
Last edited:
.
.
World | Thu May 14, 2015 5:58am EDT
Related: WORLD, CHINA, JAPAN
U.S. Marines look to nurture integrated Asia-Pacific amphibious forces, China excluded

U.S. military forces aboard Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV) manuevre on South China Sea near the shore of San Antonio, Zambales during the annual 'Balikatan' (shoulder-to-shoulder) war games with Filipino soldiers in northern Philippines in this April 21, 2015 file photo. ...
REUTERS/ERIK DE CASTRO/FILES

The U.S. Marine Corps is bringing together foreign commanders from amphibious forces deployed mostly in the Asia-Pacific for a conference aimed at taking steps to integrate operations, with China excluded from the event, according to officials and planning documents.

The effort centers on a first-of-its-kind conference between the Marine Corps and military officials from 23 countries that opens in Hawaii on Monday. More than half the nations attending are from Asia, including some embroiled in territorial disputes with China such as Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam.

On the agenda will be amphibious assault tactics, including ship-to-shore assaults, and a demonstration of shore landing tactics, said a USMC spokesman in Hawaii.

A planning document prepared by a consultant to the U.S. military and reviewed by Reuters notes that China should "not be invited" because it's a "competitor" to the United States and some of the countries attending.

Washington has grown increasingly critical of China's assertiveness in the disputed South China Sea, especially its land reclamation around seven reefs in the Spratly chain. Satellite images show at least one airstrip under construction.

A U.S. official said on Tuesday that the Pentagon was considering sending U.S. military aircraft and ships to assert freedom of navigation around the reefs.

Asked about China's exclusion, the Marine spokesman said U.S. law prohibited military-to-military exchanges with China at such events.

U.S. defense officials added that it was not unusual to exclude Chinese military personnel from participating in some training hosted by U.S. forces.

China took part in U.S.-led Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercises last year with more than 20 countries, but one defense official noted its participation was limited to things like humanitarian relief and search and rescue operations.

China's Defence Ministry had no immediate comment.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said that any country had the right to invite who it wanted to a meeting or event, as long as it was beneficial for maintaining regional peace and stability.

"The militaries of China and the United States have normal exchanges and cooperation on various levels," Hua told a daily news briefing.

BEACH LANDINGS

Amphibious forces specialize in launching maritime operations including beach landings from boats and helicopters and are often used to deliver and coordinate aid following natural disasters. The vast island-dotted and disaster-prone geography of Asia lends itself to such operations.

A key goal of the Hawaii meeting would be to lay the groundwork for multilateral amphibious exercises, including drills between participant nations, even without U.S. involvement, the planning document said.

On Tuesday, the visiting military officials will observe a U.S. Marine exercise involving helicopter carriers, landing ships and other vessels that will create an offshore sea base that could be used in combat or to coordinate disaster relief.

Brigadier Richard Spencer, deputy commander of the British Royal Marines, who will attend the conference, said it would be a success if it paved the way for participating nations to run joint disaster relief efforts using marine forces.

"My inclination would be to start with a relatively realistic level of ambition ... I would rather set a low bar and achieve it," Spencer told Reuters on the sidelines of a defense conference in the Japanese city of Yokohama.

The U.S. Marines were the "logical integrator" for amphibious capabilities in Asia, which would interest allies like Japan, South Korea and Australia, said Michael Green, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

"(It would) also be helpful to other partners dealing with vulnerabilities from natural disasters to encroachment and coercion by large maritime claimants," he said.

China claims most of the South China Sea. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also claim parts of the waterway.

China last month defended its Spratlys reclamation, saying the new islands would provide civilian services such as search and rescue facilities.

Beijing is also at loggerheads with Japan over uninhabited isles in the East China Sea.

HARLEM GLOBETROTTERS?

U.S. military planners are concerned that bilateral exercises between American forces and friendly nations around Asia have done little more than show off the U.S. Marines.

In such drills the Marines are like the Harlem Globetrotters, the basketball entertainers who outmatch their hapless opponents, said the consultant to the U.S. military, who declined to be identified because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

With some 80,000 personnel or almost half its strength in Asia, the U.S. Marines are the biggest amphibious force in the region. Most are based on Japan's Okinawa island on the edge of the East China Sea.

With around 12,000 marines, China is a formidable potential foe, say military experts.

Countries in dispute with China over territory in the South China Sea don't have large amphibious forces.

Two late entrants to amphibious warfare training are close U.S. allies: Australia and Japan.

Australia last year launched the Canberra, the first of two planned amphibious ships, each able to land 1,000 troops. Japan, which under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is pursuing a more muscular defense policy, is training its first marines since World War Two.

Melding an integrated amphibious force in Asia able to divide tasks between nations and operate seamlessly would take time, said Ben Schreer, senior defense strategy analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

"The challenges are military complexity, capability standards, limited funding, competing priorities and, in some cases, overlapping claims in the South China Sea," he said.
 
.
I guess these are pretty much related to the message what @Genesis has been trying to convey.

US actions seem pretty much one-sided: They do achieve their part in terms of preparation, build-up and execution, but they are ineffective for their ultimate objective.

China Snubbed as Pentagon Moves to Integrate Asian Amphibious Forces / Sputnik International

US to Deploy Strategic Bombers in Australia as Chinese Concern Grows / Sputnik International

Contention and tension is the best international norm for a rising power.

Expert: PLA navy high seas exercises to be a standard practice - People's Daily Online
 
Last edited:
.
The most nonsense part is HSR.
HSR is for civil purpose only.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom