China thinks it can defeat America in battle

[Carlosa]

China lacks in Air Force as for Navy in next 5 years they will match up with current production rate but for Air Force its still is 10 years away

It remains to be seen if the PLAN can match the US navy in quality to begin with.
5 years is not enough by far to match US naval forces, you just need to check out the numbers, 62 AEGIS destroyers and 22 AEGIS cruisers, it will take quite a bit of time for the PLAN to match that.

Anyway, the point of the article is the power of American subs and frankly, I don't see how or when the PLAN will be able to neutralize that threat.

China's ASW capabilities are quite weak at the moment and even that they are trying to close that gap, even the top ASW capabilities of anybody today can't defeat American subs.

As some sailors say, there are 2 types of ships, subs and targets.

 

[TaiShang]

Apologies? Dictating ultimatums to the the mods? Aren't you a drama queen

There's nothing to substantiate your claim of an "absolute lack of ethics", or that "flaming insults" were made. The most antagonistic thing he said was to call you a "flame-seeking liar". And the first part is true: posting a year old article when it has already been posted in multiple threads (and very poorly received) is a provocative, flame-baiting approach. But more seriously, being disrespectful of China's territorial integrity is more than just flame-seeking, it's a deeply sinful stance to take. Are you an observant and God-fearing Catholic? If so, you should be familiar with Jesus' proverb:

"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

By refusing and blaspheming against China's [Caesar] territorial sovereignty, you are committing an offense in the eyes of God. And you have done so repeatedly on this forum.

The particular problem with the OP is not that it is one year old. Some articles, even one year old, remain factual and relevant.

It is the academic quality of the OP that is problematic.

First of all, it generalizes without substantiation.

Second of all, the arguments hung in limbo. The starts with "China thinks it can defeat the US" argument and, without basing it on any substantial proof, moves from there to reach a myriad of conclusion.

In that regard, it is flame-baiting. Because, such articles are easy to find but lead nowhere except antagonism.

 

[seven7seven]

Another dumb article. China isn't looking to start a war. It's the US who wants to antagonize China's neighbours to get them involved in one. China is perfectly happy with the way they are slowly increasing their influence and power, regionally. It's the US who is desperate and itching to instigate something because they know they can never compete economically with China.

 

[Carlosa]

The particular problem with the OP is not that it is one year old. Some articles, even one year old, remain factual and relevant.

It is the academic quality of the OP that is problematic.

First of all, it generalizes without substantiation.

Second of all, the arguments hung in limbo. The starts with "China thinks it can defeat the US" argument and, without basing it on any substantial proof, moves from there to reach a myriad of conclusion.

In that regard, it is flame-baiting. Because, such articles are easy to find but lead nowhere except antagonism.

Its an article essentially about military strategy and the power of submarines which is an issue that is relevant today and will stay relevant years from now. You don't agree with the arguments of the article, then enter the discussion and refute the arguments of the article. Attacking with flaming statements is totally uncalled for and anyway, you based your attack on the article being related to the poll which has already been demonstrated that is not, but you don't seem to want to admit that you made a mistake.

 

[BoQ77]

Its an article essentially about military strategy and the power of submarines which is an issue that is relevant today and will stay relevant years from now. You don't agree with the arguments of the article, then enter the discussion and refute the arguments of the article. Attacking with flaming statements is totally uncalled for and anyway, you based your attack on the article being related to the poll which has already been demonstrated that is not, but you don't seem to want to admit that you made a mistake.

How you think about decision to buy Kilo class subs of Vietnam military leaders? In order to receive 4 of them now, the deal signed in 2009.

The biggest of its kind in Southeast Asia at the time.

 

[Carlosa]

Another dumb article. China isn't looking to start a war. It's the US who wants to antagonize China's neighbours to get them involved in one. China is perfectly happy with the way they are slowly increasing their influence and power, regionally. It's the US who is desperate and itching to instigate something because they know they can never compete economically with China.

Why is the article dumb? Is the content not relevant?

Do you have a crystal ball about whether a conflict can happen or not? Don't PLA generals talk about war and about pushing the US out of the first island chain, etc, etc? Who are you to say that a war will not happen?

How you think about decision to buy Kilo class subs of Vietnam military leaders? In order to receive 4 of them now, the deal signed in 2009.

Best decision Vietnam ever made since subs are the big equalizers of the sea. VN needs to buy more.
As I said many times in this forum, VN has not a chance to contest China's naval superiority in SCS with surface forces. Air forces have a chance if they are in enough numbers and depending on the circumstances.
Surface forces are of little use, subs on the other hand, can go against anything. The more subs the better.

 

[BoQ77]

Why is the article dumb? Is the content not relevant?

Do you have a crystal ball about whether a conflict can happen or not? Don't PLA generals talk about war and about pushing the US out of the first island chain, etc, etc? Who are you to say that a war will not happen?

Best decision Vietnam ever made since subs are the big equalizers of the sea. VN needs to buy more.
As I said many times in this forum, VN has not a chance to contest China's naval superiority in SCS with surface forces. Air forces have a chance if they are in enough numbers and depending on the circumstances.
Surface forces are of little use, subs on the other hand, can go against anything. The more subs the better.

Yep, surface ships almost for littoral mission, as missile launchers ; but last year, the first time 2x Gepard of Vietnam has a tour to neighbors. And rumor said that on the way back from PH, those Gepard surprised the 053H2 in land reclamation area. It has been heard that Vietnam under testing the stealth coating for their aircrafts and warships.

 

[seven7seven]

Why is the article dumb? Is the content not relevant?

Do you have a crystal ball about whether a conflict can happen or not? Don't PLA generals talk about war and about pushing the US out of the first island chain, etc, etc? Who are you to say that a war will not happen?

Every country has their hawks but the people in power in China are not trigger-happy warmongers. China will defend their national interests within their own sphere of influence, no matter who it is, US included. Within their own territory, China is confident of making any cost of war unacceptable to any possible enemy.

I am not saying war isn't possible but it won't be China instigating it. China's economic trajectory will naturally elevate them as the most powerful nation over time and it's a desperate and declining US that wants to disrupt this.

 

[Carlosa]

Yep, surface ships almost for littoral mission, as missile launchers ; but last year, the first time 2x Gepard of Vietnam has a tour to neighbors. And rumor said that on the way back from PH, those Gepard surprised the 053H2 in land reclamation area. It has been heard that Vietnam under testing the stealth coating for their aircrafts and warships.

Thank you for bringing that up, now I'd like to hear chinese members to say again that there is no chance of war, in which case these articles are irrelevant which means that they have a license to troll.

Of course, none of them are going to come and say that they were wrong.

Every country has their hawks but the people in power in China are not trigger-happy warmongers. China will defend their national interests within their own sphere of influence, no matter who it is, US included. Within their own territory, China is confident of making any cost of war unacceptable to any possible enemy.

I am not saying war isn't possible but it won't be China instigating it. China's economic trajectory will naturally elevate them as the most powerful nation over time and it's a desperate and declining US that wants to disrupt this.

No, you can't say that. There are plenty of haws in china and they are not under full control of the party. Just an example, when XI visited India, the hawks started aggressive border actions against India right at the time of the visit in order to derailed the talks and XI himself clearly implied that they were not following orders.

Yep, surface ships almost for littoral mission, as missile launchers ; but last year, the first time 2x Gepard of Vietnam has a tour to neighbors. And rumor said that on the way back from PH, those Gepard surprised the 053H2 in land reclamation area. It has been heard that Vietnam under testing the stealth coating for their aircrafts and warships.

Yes, that was very interesting. As I hear, that stealth coating can absorb 97 / 98 % of radar waves in the areas where it is applied. That's quite a bit. That being said, there are many ways of detection and with satellites and AWACS, etc is not easy to navigate undetected in case of war.

 

[BoQ77]

Thank you for bringing that up, now I'd like to hear chinese members to say again that there is no chance of war, in which case these articles are irrelevant which means that they have a license to troll.

Of course, none of them are going to come and say that they were wrong.



No, you can't say that. There are plenty of haws in china and they are not under full control of the party. Just an example, when XI visited India, the hawks started aggressive border actions against India right at the time of the visit in order to derailed the talks and XI himself clearly implied that they were not following orders.

When Chinese hawks still criticise Japan on WW2 issue, they can't make other neighbors forget about wars of a Communism China during post WW-2 era.

against India in 1962
against Soviet Union in 1969
against Vietnam in 1979

which China planned and triggered intentionally.
They also have their hands in Korean war, Vietnam war, Khmer Rouge... which could lead to direct/indirect confrontation against American

 

[JSCh]

I did not notice the article is old as well. When I read the title, I also thought that it is derived from the recent poll.

Now that I know, I think the "PLA think" part derived from the induction of the DF-21D.

The author rather rudely, stated as a fact, without evident, that PLA used to plan to launch preemptive missile strike against US bases. And expect that action to disable US forces ability to intervene in Chinese military campaign across the Taiwan strait.

This according to the author, because the PLA "genuinely believed it could not win unless the Americans were removed from the battlefield before the main campaign even began."

This I presumed, is because the author believe, that the PLA believe itself hopeless against the at one time super duper US CVBG.

The logic continue that, with the advent of the DF-21D, that scenario is no longer true.

Now the author believe that the PLA believe they can do anything they want across the Taiwan strait!!

BUT the PLA is wrong in believing so, because US has this secret weapon, the super duper submarine force!!!

He then go on to explain how the submarine "would likely be able to intercept and sink Chinese amphibious transports" across the Taiwan strait.

The whole thing read like a kindergarten play. The guy see war like a simplistic game, like he is talking to children or something.

Anyway, he is envisioning using submarine force as a picket against navy force/ship. That is pretty original, I think.

He also ignore China conventional submarine and future ASW capability that I had already posted some, and one more here..

Meet China’s Submarine-Hunting Frigate | The Diplomat

 

[slng]

You merely speculating. If you have the interest, you should be looking at the more prone war thread which might excite you.

The topic is misleading and as you might have other 999 thread speculating every potential countries going war, I see this pointless argument after all.

 

[Carlosa]

I did not notice the article is old as well. When I read the title, I also thought that it is derived from the recent poll.

Now that I know, I think the "PLA think" part derived from the induction of the DF-21D.

The author rather rudely, stated as a fact, without evident, that PLA used to plan to launch preemptive missile strike against US bases. And expect that action to disable US forces ability to intervene in Chinese military campaign across the Taiwan strait.

This according to the author, because the PLA "genuinely believed it could not win unless the Americans were removed from the battlefield before the main campaign even began."

This I presumed, is because the author believe, that the PLA believe itself hopeless against the at one time super duper US CVBG.

The logic continue that, with the advent of the DF-21D, that scenario is no longer true.

Now the author believe that the PLA believe they can do anything they want across the Taiwan strait!!

BUT the PLA is wrong in believing so, because US has this secret weapon, the super duper submarine force!!!

He then go on to explain how the submarine "would likely be able to intercept and sink Chinese amphibious transports" across the Taiwan strait.

The whole thing read like a kindergarten play. The guy see war like a simplistic game, like he is talking to children or something.

Anyway, he is envisioning using submarine force as a picket against navy force/ship. That is pretty original, I think.

He also ignore China conventional submarine and future ASW capability that I had already posted some, and one more here..

Meet China’s Submarine-Hunting Frigate | The Diplomat

How is it "original" for submarines to operate against naval forces? Isn't that what they usually do?

Present chinese subs and ASW capabilities are far from being able to dent American sub superiority. Even the best American ASW assets which are superior to china's are not effective against American subs.

The simple truth is that China doesn't have an answer at the moment against American subs.

Let me say it again, subs are very difficult to detect. Period.

 

[gambit]

The whole thing read like a kindergarten play. The guy see war like a simplistic game, like he is talking to children or something.

You guys have got to stop calling other people 'children' just because you do not like their premises. For as long as I have been on this forum, no one on this forum take warfare as childishly as the Chinese members. You profusely 'thank' each other for mindless drivel about 'thermonuclear' this and 'EMP' that, as if warfare is a video game. Do you even know what a .22 caliber recoil felt like ? Whereas the Americans on this forum came from the Army, Navy, and Air Force. We are waiting for a Marine. We know what it is like to ruck a hundred pounds in the heat, deafened from the roar of afterburner jet engines, felt the g forces of a high performance jet fighter, and know what it is like to be on a rolling ship in high seas. What can you guys contribute other than simplistic views of warfare drawn from video games ?

 

[Carlosa]

When Chinese hawks still criticise Japan on WW2 issue, they can't make other neighbors forget about wars of a Communism China during post WW-2 era.

against India in 1962
against Soviet Union in 1969
against Vietnam in 1979

which China planned and triggered intentionally.
They also have their hands in Korean war, Vietnam war, Khmer Rouge... which could lead to direct/undirect confrontation against American

The simple truth is that the chinese military talks about war all the time and they train and plan for war (same as all others), so for chinese members to come here and pretend to guarantee that war will not happen is simply foolish and unrealistic.

You guys have got to stop calling other people 'children' just because you do not like their premises. For as long as I have been on this forum, no one on this forum take warfare as childishly as the Chinese members. You profusely 'thank' each other for mindless drivel about 'thermonuclear' this and 'EMP' that, as if warfare is a video game. Do you even know what a .22 caliber recoil felt like ? Whereas the Americans on this forum came from the Army, Navy, and Air Force. We are waiting for a Marine. We know what it is like to ruck a hundred pounds in the heat, deafened from the roar of afterburner jet engines, felt the g forces of a high performance jet fighter, and know what it is like to be on a rolling ship in high seas. What can you guys contribute other than simplistic views of warfare drawn from video games ?

Words of wisdom, thank you.