What's new

U.S. Sends Second Carrier to Asia Amid Tensions with China

After doing some research, it turns out the OP's article is highly misleading. I guess that's what you get for quoting a neocon rag like 'Washington Free Beacon'. Anyway, the Carl Vinson carrier is heading towards Asia ... towards the Middle East. This was a scheduled deployment, planned a long time ago, and made most likely to put pressure on ISIS:

Stirring Pride and Tears, Carl Vinson Steams Out for Middle East - Times of San Diego

The Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group set off Friday for a deployment to the Western Pacific and Middle East, as thousands of family and well-wishers watched from ashore.

Families gathered as early as 4 a.m. at North Island Naval Air Station in Coronado to bid farewell to sons, daughters, husbands and wives stationed on the Vinson. Expressing sadness, yet love and pride, the loved ones cheered and waved goodbye for what was a first deployment for some and a four and fifth for others.

Some of the well wishers carried homemade signs addressed to their favorite Navy personnel, while young mothers held their infants or had small children in tow for the emotional send off.

The U.S. has been conducting air strikes in Iraq against the Islamic State, an extremist group that has taken control of several cities in the northern part of the country, and is accused of genocide against religious minorities. It’s unclear if the air units aboard the Vinson will participate in the strikes.

Carrier Air Wing 17, which includes nine fixed-wing and helicopter squadrons, will be aboard the Vinson.

The deployment is expected to last at least nine months for the 6,200 sailors in the carrier group.

The vessels in the strike force, led by the Vinson, are the guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill and guided-missile destroyers USS Gridley, USS Sterett and USS Dewey.

The aircraft carrier is named after Carl Vinson, who served in Congress for 50 years. It has gained attention in the last several years because of the crew’s involvement in the 2011 operation that ended in terrorist Osama bin Laden’s death and a visit by President Barack Obama when the NCAA men’s 2011 basketball season opened aboard the ship.


More articles:

USS Carl Vinson Strike Group Ships Out for Deployment | NBC 7 San Diego
USS Carl Vinson strike group deploys to Middle East - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego
Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group Departs San Diego Friday For Middle East Deployment | KPBS

Looks like we won't get to party now :cry: :cry: :cry:
 
I think we should close quarrel here between American and Chinese members.

Such idea of 300x Tomahawk fire to China or China fire CJ-10/YJ-12/C802 cruise missile to U.S or DF-21 to Navy A.C groups, all r stupid right now. Before u press War Button, i wish we really think twice and clearly understand the next result to both nations and ppl.

A soldier just follow the order and give his life on the battle, but a smart government should think more for the nation. Especially the WAR between U.N Top5, it's enough power to change another human history.

U.S, Russia, China, E.U and other powers, all each just waiting for the weak time of their rival and takeover his postion anytime. So a insignificant & time-waste & huge casualties WAR , also will kill urself at last, i think a good strategist must think more further than a normal soldier.
 
Last edited:
After doing some research, it turns out the OP's article is highly misleading. I guess that's what you get for quoting a neocon rag like 'Washington Free Beacon'. Anyway, the Carl Vinson carrier is heading towards Asia ... towards the Middle East. This was a scheduled deployment, planned a long time ago, and made most likely to put pressure on ISIS:

Stirring Pride and Tears, Carl Vinson Steams Out for Middle East - Times of San Diego




More articles:

USS Carl Vinson Strike Group Ships Out for Deployment | NBC 7 San Diego
USS Carl Vinson strike group deploys to Middle East - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego
Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group Departs San Diego Friday For Middle East Deployment | KPBS

Looks like we won't get to party now :cry: :cry: :cry:

The Navy is sending a second aircraft carrier strike group to the Asia Pacific region amid new tensions with China over a dangerous aerial encounter between a Chinese interceptor and Navy P-8 surveillance craft.

The strike group led by the USS Carl Vinson departed San Diego for the Pacific on Friday, the Navy said in an announcement of what it terms a “planned” deployment.




U.S. sends second carrier to Asia amid tensions with China; USS Carl Vinson departed Friday - Washington Times
 
The Navy is sending a second aircraft carrier strike group to the Asia Pacific region amid new tensions with China over a dangerous aerial encounter between a Chinese interceptor and Navy P-8 surveillance craft.

The strike group led by the USS Carl Vinson departed San Diego for the Pacific on Friday, the Navy said in an announcement of what it terms a “planned” deployment.


U.S. sends second carrier to Asia amid tensions with China; USS Carl Vinson departed Friday - Washington Times

This is literally the same article as the WFB one. And even if it were a fresh article, it wouldn't be credible because Washington Times is run by a Korean polygamist cult. It's actually not mainstream media.
 
This is literally the same article as the WFB one. And even if it were a fresh article, it wouldn't be credible because Washington Times is run by a Korean polygamist cult. It's actually not mainstream media.

LOL at "Korean polygamist cult". Oh you have such creative reasoning(s).
 
USS Carl Vinson Strike Group deployed on Friday August 22, 2014


US_Navy_090320-N-9928E-304_The_aircraft_carrier_USS_John_C._Stennis_%28CVN_74%29_and_ships_of_the_John_C._Stennis_Carrier_Strike_Group_are_underway_in_formation_with_naval_vessels_from_the_Republic_of_Korea.jpg



USS Carl Vinson Strike Group Ships Out for Deployment | NBC 7 San Diego


@F-22Raptor , may i ask how many SSNSs are usually attached to a USN Strike Group?

Two is my guess, but the operation of our subs is for the most part classified.
 
bahahah, I love how the Chinese think they actually rival NATO or the United States right now, yes you have grown tremendously but don't get it twisted, we aren't very concerned about winning a war against you, it would be much easier than Iraq as it would be a clear objective and not an occupation, just an *** whoopings.

This is all you really need to know.

Total Air Power

China: 2,788

United States: 13,683
Japan: 1,595

Total for USA/Japan: 15278

Further, our navy makes yours look like it belongs in the last century we could effectively blockade any imports of energy making you rely on your 4 million barrel a day production which im sure we would bomb pretty early in the conflict. Before you go on about our debt you need to realize that any country that is the world reserve currency has to expand debt to let liquidity exist, our debt isn't that big of a deal at the moment, the only thing that can bring us down is not even military but the loss of global reserve currency status, which is a possibility, but military, pfft please. BTW I have trained with Chinese troops once in 2006 and to be honest the ones you put forward were impressive, but as I seen the "average" soldier they were short, pudgy soft little kids if you ask me, I think this is a result of the one child policy and kids growing up as the only child and being pampered and put on a pedestal

Hello Patton, please introduce yourself in the introductions section.
 
@Raphael @cnleio

Why the gleeful attitude? Reckless actions like these can lead to misunderstandings, misunderstanding can lead to conflict, and conflict can lead to war. War isn't exactly a pragmatic outcome if China just wants to blow its load showing off.

@Chinese-Dragon do you know if these pilots are subjected to psychometric screening? Or, I shudder to speculate, specifically selected for their aggressiveness?

I remember you once asked me why China dislike America. Well, here it is. Regardless of what type of operation this is on or whether it is legal, or anything else, can you not see how this would look to Chinese.

You can say we can do the same, but we can't, we can't exert the same pressure as you can, so even if we do sent our ships there it wouldn't mean as much. America is giving China a lot of reasons to build up the same capabilities.

Whether you agree with what I said, you should at least agree, if the shoe was on the other foot it would not be as comfortable.


When China sent that spy ship during RIMPAC, and America made a comment, America wasn't threatened or anything, but you made a comment and made a deal out of it non the less. Regardless of what was said, America clearly felt it was outside of expectation, if it was 100% normal, it would not have received much coverage.

So these things, bothers America as well, but due to the difference in strength, you don't feel it as much as we do.

Another example is we use to pull some of the same in the China Seas, but only now are we called destabilizing, why? Because we are far stronger now. In fact our actions prior could have been more intimidating seeing as how we actually opened fire.



Bottomline, we don't hate America, but you can see how actions like this is giving every reason for China to up the ante. Look at the other comments on this thread alone, the things suggested, does it really feel like a one sided communist plot to you.
 
This is literally the same article as the WFB one. And even if it were a fresh article, it wouldn't be credible because Washington Times is run by a Korean polygamist cult. It's actually not mainstream media.

So the WFB is run by neocons, WT is run by a Korean cult. I look forward to the conspiracy handbook entry for who runs the USN:

Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group Departs for Deployment
 
So the WFB is run by neocons, WT is run by a Korean cult. I look forward to the conspiracy handbook entry for who runs the USN:

Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group Departs for Deployment

It's not a conspiracy who runs those disreputable "news" agencies. WFB is run by Bill Gertz, a neocon. WT is run by the Unification Church, a Korean polygamist cult whose founder was convicted of and jailed for withholding taxes, like most religious charlatans do. In fact, Gertz is a convert to this cult and also a columnist at WT, so trying to pass them off as 2 different sources is just laughable.

Anyway, I have no objection to your article. Notice it hasn't sensationalized anyway. The OP's article's desperate and misguided attempt to link this scheduled deployment with recent drama in the South China Sea was precisely the reason you got confused and didn't realize what my "glee" was directed at.
 
I remember you once asked me why China dislike America. Well, here it is. Regardless of what type of operation this is on or whether it is legal, or anything else, can you not see how this would look to Chinese.

You can say we can do the same, but we can't, we can't exert the same pressure as you can, so even if we do sent our ships there it wouldn't mean as much. America is giving China a lot of reasons to build up the same capabilities.

Whether you agree with what I said, you should at least agree, if the shoe was on the other foot it would not be as comfortable.


When China sent that spy ship during RIMPAC, and America made a comment, America wasn't threatened or anything, but you made a comment and made a deal out of it non the less. Regardless of what was said, America clearly felt it was outside of expectation, if it was 100% normal, it would not have received much coverage.

So these things, bothers America as well, but due to the difference in strength, you don't feel it as much as we do.

Another example is we use to pull some of the same in the China Seas, but only now are we called destabilizing, why? Because we are far stronger now. In fact our actions prior could have been more intimidating seeing as how we actually opened fire.



Bottomline, we don't hate America, but you can see how actions like this is giving every reason for China to up the ante. Look at the other comments on this thread alone, the things suggested, does it really feel like a one sided communist plot to you.

I understand that sending CBGs into China's back yard can be seen as threatening. I also understand that China has the right to intercept spy planes off of its coast.

The problem in this particular case, though, is our history. Remember the first Hainan Island incident. A Chinese fighter jet should have no reason to behave like this towards a slow, unarmed, unescorted plane. It should intercept and shadow, sure, but don't play chicken in the air. The first time a collision happens, tempers flare, but diplomacy can soothe the situation. The second time, I have no idea what would happen, but why would China risk this? I see zero payoff for China to send a mentally unstable (or incompetent) pilot to do this kind of patrol when we already saw what happened the last time China sent out a mentally unstable/incompetent pilot in 2001.

Compounding the problem is that China could have responded neutrally, saying something along the lines of "we take these allegations seriously, and will investigate.". You see? No apology, no loss of face, but simultaneously reassure the US that China is a rational actor, with a professional military--and most importantly, that the political echelon is actually in control of the military, which is quietly an open question here in the US. Instead, the Chinese government issued some internally inconsistent statement (to put it diplomatically) about international law, and China's rights. Of course, this is not evidence of a "responsible power" who respects and upholds the rules of the game, and of course it does not demonstrate "a new type of great power relationship.". If we don't know what to expect from China (since it doesn't follow "the rules") then we will be suspicious of China. If we are suspicious, next time we will send the plane with a fighter escort.

Now the US is sending spy planes with fighter escorts to gather intel on China. Naturally, tensions will rise. What has China gained by having its incompetent pilot harass our unarmed planes? Escalation. For a leadership that prides itself on pragmatism, this is a terrible blunder, and possibly a display of incompetence in itself (or again, possibly a sign that the political echelon does not control the military, which is terrifying).

Finally, the US has decades of experience with challenges to our territorial airspace by the USSR, so when Russia sent its Tu-95s within 50 miles of California, we didn't buzz them, barrel roll on top of them, or play chicken with them. We handled it professionally (just like Russia does with our patrols). Why shouldn't we expect the same of China? Chinese leaders and Chinese soldiers are not children who pull pranks. This is serious business, not the time to play games. The proportional response by China is to mirror our actions by sending patrols to the US, like the USSR used to do.

In short, I understand Chinese discomfort, but the Chinese reaction seems calculated to increase tensions, which will only increase the discomfort. What is China playing at, here?
 
Back
Top Bottom