Chinese submarines, destroyers spotted in high seas near Okinawa

[faithfulguy]

the burden of launching any nuclear war is on japan and the US, not on china. if japan reacts to a conventional attack with nuclear weapons then all bets are off.

the US would likely not act preemptively on behalf of japan. but if it does we are ready. not only a few DF-31 and DF-5s, but 6 boatloads of JL-2 can also be launched. needless to say, losing most US population centers will result in a major decline of relative US power.

the US should start lying low like Britain did in the 50's when it prepared for its collapse. After the end of the British Empire in the 60's, britain was no longer a hated country. If the US continues down its current track, the fate of the Soviet Union could seem very benign.

your description of US would be true if this is the year 2110, not 2010. US is equivalent of the British empire in the year 1810 not, 1910. The life of the US global supremecy is still at least 100 years by the most conservative estimate. I would not get into the comparason of US boomers vs a few JL2. Most of these JL2 is probably shadowed by a Virginia sub anyway and any signed of nuclear launch would cause the a attack sub to take them out.
But this is the besides the topic.

The relationship of US and China hold the balance of the global growth and prosperity. Its the most important bilateral relationship on the earth today. US sees China as a country to work with to bring peace and prosperity. China for its part must be a responsible shareholder of the world peace. It must does it part to ensure that Iran doesn't develop any nuclear weapon and NK get rid of its WMD.

 

[gambit]

a shame for the japanese. their once feared navy is just the US's coast guard now.

The PLAN is a 'brown water' navy, so what else is it but a 'coast guard' navy?

The Japanese Navy is neither as weak nor inexperienced as you would like to delude yourself. When the Europeans were busy exploiting mainland China at the turn of the 20th century, the Japanese Navy defeated the Russian Navy in a naval battle that became a textbook lesson on fleet maneuvers.

Battle of Tsushima - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was a devastating loss for Russia, which lost all of its battleships, most of its cruisers and destroyers, and effectively ended the Russo-Japanese war in Japan's favor. The Russians suffered 4,380 killed and 5,917 captured, including 2 admirals and 1,862 interned.

The Japanese lost only three torpedo boats (Nos. 34, 35 and 69), 117 killed and 500 wounded.

In WW II, the Imperial Japanese Navy was no less cunning nor willing to fight than the US Navy. It was only the US overwhelming industrial might that saved the Americans, as predicted by the man who planned the Pearl Harbor surprise attack. So from the start of the 20th century to now, Japan as a naval power have about one hundred years of institutional knowledge on modern naval operations, maneuvers and combat tactics. What does the PLAN has other than what the Soviets taught?

 

[scuthan]

The PLAN is a 'brown water' navy, so what else is it but a 'coast guard' navy?

The Japanese Navy is neither as weak nor inexperienced as you would like to delude yourself. When the Europeans were busy exploiting mainland China at the turn of the 20th century, the Japanese Navy defeated the Russian Navy in a naval battle that became a textbook lesson on fleet maneuvers.

Battle of Tsushima - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In WW II, the Imperial Japanese Navy was no less cunning nor willing to fight than the US Navy. It was only the US overwhelming industrial might that saved the Americans, as predicted by the man who planned the Pearl Harbor surprise attack. So from the start of the 20th century to now, Japan as a naval power have about one hundred years of institutional knowledge on modern naval operations, maneuvers and combat tactics. What does the PLAN has other than what the Soviets taught?

500 years ago, china has the largest navy and best navigation technology in world, dwarfing all other countries on this planet put together. Columbus's fleet were merely small rafts in comparasion.
Zheng He - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

150 years agp, china began to build the first modern navy in asia, and were engaged with japanese navy in the first modern sea battle of the world's military history in 1895.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Yalu_River_(1894)

Chinese Navy has a long history before the PLAN era and I am also curious what PLAN were taught by soviets. Soviet Navy themselves also have few experience in large scale sea battle after 1917. Nobody here is saying that japanese Navy is weak historically, but their past glory cannot guarantee ever-lasting advantage. Spainish, Dutch, British Navy all had dominance over oceans in the past. what are about their current state?

Check the inventory of japanese navy, it is not as strong as you thought. its core is composed of a few AEGIS destroyers. If PLAN is a brown water navy, japanese navy won't be far better than that. they did have overwheming superiority over PLAN a decade ago. As the increasing number of new frigates (054A) destroyers(052C), Submarines(Yuan) are inducted in PLAN in recent years, they stand zero chance to win a sea battle near chinese mainland under the cover of PLAN AF, land-based Radar network and satellite intelligance today. I don't think their experience in WWII could probably works out much for today's sea battle. if PLAN keep the current momentum in warship production or even slow down a little bit, the balance will still skewed towards the china's side with no doubt in a potential sea battle in a decade .

 

[gambit]

500 years ago, china has the largest navy and best navigation technology in world, dwarfing all other countries on this planet put together. Columbus's fleet were merely small rafts in comparasion.
Zheng He - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

150 years agp, china began to build the first modern navy in asia, and were engaged with japanese navy in the first modern sea battle of the world's military history in 1895.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Yalu_River_(1894)

Chinese Navy has a long history before the PLAN era and I am also curious what PLAN were taught by soviets. Soviet Navy themselves also have few experience in large scale sea battle after 1917. Nobody here is saying that japanese Navy is weak historically, but their past glory cannot guarantee ever-lasting advantage. Spainish, Dutch, British Navy all had dominance over oceans in the past. what are about their current state?

And yet you see no issues with bringing up sailing technology and techniques 150 yrs ago.

Check the inventory of japanese navy, it is not as strong as you thought. its core is composed of a few AEGIS destroyers. If PLAN is a brown water navy, japanese navy won't be far better than that.

The Japanese never claimed theirs to be anything but 'brown water'.

they did have overwheming superiority over PLAN a decade ago. As the increasing number of new frigates (054A) destroyers(052C), Submarines(Yuan) are inducted in PLAN in recent years, they stand zero chance to win a sea battle near chinese mainland under the cover of PLAN AF, land-based Radar network and satellite intelligance today. I don't think their experience in WWII could probably works out much for today's sea battle. if PLAN keep the current momentum in warship production or even slow down a little bit, the balance will still skewed towards the china's side with no doubt in a potential sea battle in a decade .

Based upon what analysis? You had no issues bringing up past Chinese naval history. Am not talking about numerical parity. Am asking based on what analysis that advises any navy not to draw upon their history in powered, not sail dependent, ships. And if there is a shooting naval fight in Asia involving Japan, the USN will certainly be involved as well. So I would like to see any analysis that said our combined combat experience, if not numerical parity to the PLAN force, will not matter in said sea battle.

 

[JonAsad]

Would things be peaceful if Indian Navy was patrolling 130-140 kms from Karachi??

Pakistan would be on HIGH alert. They would send in subs and frigates to counter us.

This kind of move is provoking the opposition.

There is nothing peaceful in it.

no we will not send subs or frigates to retaliate.. we will send ome crusie missiles to destroy u.. hehe hahaha
provoked aren't u? dats wots u were trying to do hena?

 

[dingyibvs]

In WW II, the Imperial Japanese Navy was no less cunning nor willing to fight than the US Navy. It was only the US overwhelming industrial might that saved the Americans, as predicted by the man who planned the Pearl Harbor surprise attack. So from the start of the 20th century to now, Japan as a naval power have about one hundred years of institutional knowledge on modern naval operations, maneuvers and combat tactics. What does the PLAN has other than what the Soviets taught?

Yea, one hundreds years of knowledge. I'm sure all those WWII tactics and experiences ingrained into the minds of thousands of now deceased or senile Japanese officers will be useful in a war against China.

How would you compare Japan's industrial strength vs. China's? Natural resources? I'm not questioning the fact that Japan can hold China at bay, but they by themselves probably can't accomplish that feat for the simple fact that they need to import just about every natural resource they need. The U.S. would come to Japan's help though, not with nuclear weapons, but with conventional weapons, so I'm sure China wouldn't attempt such a suicide mission.

 

[applesauce]

And yet you see no issues with bringing up sailing technology and techniques 150 yrs ago.

i think he was making a point that even though china has a impressive fleet long ago that counts for nothing today, as a counter to ur WW2 experience theory.

The Japanese never claimed theirs to be anything but 'brown water'.

and the PLAN has never to claim have a blue water navy, they have aspired to be a blue water navy and is actively trying to build one but the process is on going and incomplete and it remains largely a green water navy

Based upon what analysis? You had no issues bringing up past Chinese naval history. Am not talking about numerical parity. Am asking based on what analysis that advises any navy not to draw upon their history in powered, not sail dependent, ships. And if there is a shooting naval fight in Asia involving Japan, the USN will certainly be involved as well. So I would like to see any analysis that said our combined combat experience, if not numerical parity to the PLAN force, will not matter in said sea battle.

todays navy is very different from that of WW2 i do believe that japan will have more experience if war started out tomorrow simply because they have operated farther for longer. of course the USN is unmatched here. and if a shooting war broke out tomorrow it will depend on who started it, if japan starts it the US will find it very hard to protect japan after all at that point it is not defending an ally it is helping an ally with an attack. USN aside i believe PLAN can take on the JMSDF due to numbers and availability of weapons to attack with, of course that is not to say china will get away unscathed. but with each passing day the advantage will go father and farther over to the Chinese side as its navy continues its modernization and begins to operated farther with newer equipment.

 

[RAHUL INDIAN]

i think he was making a point that even though china has a impressive fleet long ago that counts for nothing today, as a counter to ur WW2 experience theory.
.

there is something called continuity...
u cant invoke a 5000 year old scenario and say see we were great when there was time of arrows and stones, so this time also we have that knowledge when the world has totally changed....

but it does help if you have recent experiences.....as in WW2....

so stop using such counter which is foolish to say the least.....

 

[JonAsad]

On the other side, no one gives Indian laughable carrier a damn $hit except the Indians.

No one knows why you need a carrier except to boost you empty ego. We know India was invaded from the sea, but if there were a strong land army... In addition, your enemy number 1 from the north will invade you from south? In addition, there is another 2 billion+(!) laughing stock.

You never stop entertaining us, the world.

indias enemy number one is on west side add one more to the laughing stock..

 

[KS]

everybody claims that there is some undischarged debt that the Japs owe to china because they got invaded by them..
But pls remember that US also owes some un-discharged debt to the Japs nd if Chinese were to attack the Japs, Unkle ji will be forced to discharge his unpaid debts to the japs...

 

[Frankenstein]

Would things be peaceful if Indian Navy was patrolling 130-140 kms from Karachi??

Pakistan would be on HIGH alert. They would send in subs and frigates to counter us.

This kind of move is provoking the opposition.

There is nothing peaceful in it.

I remember when i was in 7 grade my teacher told me that 200 miles of sea water in our possession according to International waters agreements, as you can see in the picture:

200 miles is like 321.8688 Km so if Indian Navy was patrolling 130-140 kms from Karachi we wont be on high alert but we will obviously take action,

 

[Frankenstein]

Oceans, seas, and waters outside of national jurisdiction are referred to as the high seas, Ships sailing the high seas are generally under the jurisdiction of the flag state

 

[faithfulguy]

there is something called continuity...
u cant invoke a 5000 year old scenario and say see we were great when there was time of arrows and stones, so this time also we have that knowledge when the world has totally changed....

but it does help if you have recent experiences.....as in WW2....

so stop using such counter which is foolish to say the least.....

WWII continuity counts more for the US. less so for the Russians and almost none for Germany or Japanese today as these two countries were almost rebuilt in almost all facets.

 

[gambit]

WWII continuity counts more for the US. less so for the Russians and almost none for Germany or Japanese today as these two countries were almost rebuilt in almost all facets.

Wrong...You might want to read up on the idea 'institutional memory'. Continuity is more about the preservation of ideas and experiences than it is about structural changes and the transference of these records from one generation to the subsequent.

 

[gambit]

i think he was making a point that even though china has a impressive fleet long ago that counts for nothing today, as a counter to ur WW2 experience theory.

Who is the better choice for publishing advice...Take a look at the source for printing presses below...

Printing press - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...And ask who would you rather contract with if you want to print for the masses in the shortest possible time?

Technology often compel radical changes in operations, if not in concepts. Sailing techniques demands the sailor to be aware of changes in wind directions, thereby affecting maneuvers, thereby influential in combat. Powered ships have no such worries. If any ship that frets over changes in wind directions are aircraft carriers as the ship would prefers to launch and land aircrafts into the wind. Another appropriate analogy is the sliderule versus a Texas Instrument scientific calculator. Which engineering company is going to be more productive in the shortest possible time?

and the PLAN has never to claim have a blue water navy, they have aspired to be a blue water navy and is actively trying to build one but the process is on going and incomplete and it remains largely a green water navy

The JMSDF has more experience in 'blue water' operations than the PLAN, even though it is primarily a self defense force with no power projection ambitions.

todays navy is very different from that of WW2 i do believe that japan will have more experience if war started out tomorrow simply because they have operated farther for longer. of course the USN is unmatched here. and if a shooting war broke out tomorrow it will depend on who started it, if japan starts it the US will find it very hard to protect japan after all at that point it is not defending an ally it is helping an ally with an attack. USN aside i believe PLAN can take on the JMSDF due to numbers and availability of weapons to attack with, of course that is not to say china will get away unscathed. but with each passing day the advantage will go father and farther over to the Chinese side as its navy continues its modernization and begins to operated farther with newer equipment.

Wrong...That is not how alliances base their foundations. What we casually called 'war' is essentially a state of hostility between two or more nation-states. The two Koreas are technically at war. An 'armed conflict' is when the state of hostility, aka 'war', moved laterally. Some would call it an 'escalation', and some call it 'deterioration'. No matter what term, when there is an 'armed conflict', the state of 'war' by then has been extensively analyzed by all sides and justifications for the state of 'armed conflict' established.

If Japan is the one to move a 'war' into an 'armed conflict' by firing the first shot, the US would most likely be an already active participant leading up to that first shot -- by Japan. The alliance's justifications would have been established for said escalation. We can use the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait for example when Iraq accused Kuwait of 'lateral drilling' into Iraqi territory. The charge, true or false is irrelevant, constitute the justification process to punish Kuwait and exact revenge. If the US, based upon said analysis, determine any justification process to escalate the 'war' into an 'armed conflict', is not worthwhile for any reason, selfish or otherwise, and Japan decide to make an 'irrational' decision and proceed with that justification process, the US would or should make a public decline to support that escalation, putting Japan into an inferior position. For Japan, losing the public support of a powerful ally would force Japan to reassess the justification process that led up to the desire to escalate the 'war'.

In any alliance, there are always disparities in capabilities and experience among alliance members and there is always at least a tacit understanding that when an 'armed conflict' involve a member who depends on a militarily superior member, the inferior must do whatever he can to reduce the burden of support by the superior. So assuming the US does support Japan in moving the 'war' into an 'armed conflict', the combined capabilities and combat experience of both navies would make short work of the PLAN without requiring the US wielding the full might of the USN into this 'armed conflict'.