US 'may ease' export restrictions against Myanmar and Vietnam

[ChineseTiger1986]

...just a thought of mine...I know operating aircraft carriers require a lot of money and human resources. And Vietnam is still far from reaching that point...BUT we need mighty sticks to protect our assets in Spratlys. You never know when the Chinese start a war against Vietnam again.

Nevertherless, as Vietnam shipyards can build any kinds of civil vessels up to 100,000t and more, so theoretically we can build aircraft carriers with foreign expertise, be from Russia, Japan or America. I don´t mention China here as they will never help us.

here for instance, a Vietnamese shipyard just completed a 60 meter Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) carrier.

You won't have the capability to build a Nimitz class carrier in the next 100 years, nor you can operate this kind of monster.

China can build the 100k tons civilian ship several decades ago, but look what we are now.

yes, having aircraft carrier is a challenge, operating it is a costly business, too. and surely it is not realistic in the next few years. I see no chance that China will ever help Vietnam, not now and neither in the future.

That sucks that the US still keeps arms embargo on Vietnam. I guess they have this loser mentality, holding arms embargo to anger Vietnam. They simply cannot forget the war.

Should the US decide to lift the embargo, I think, at first step Vietnam would request to buy some Aegis destroyers. At present, the major warships Vietnam has are 2,000t Gepard frigates and 3,000t Kilo subs. And they are no match to China.

The Arleigh Burke Flight IIA costs 2 billion USD per ship, while the future Flight III may cost close to 4 billion USD per ship.

Sure you want to bankrupt yourself with that tiny economy, don't you?

 

[eazzy]

You are being way too pessimistic Eastsea. I believe Vietnam can go for a 10000000ton spaceship.

 

[EastSea]

You are being way too pessimistic Eastsea. I believe Vietnam can go for a 10000000ton spaceship.

build 10000000ton spaceship ? nonsense troll . your father can not do.

 

[Viet]

You won't have the capability to build a Nimitz class carrier in the next 100 years, nor you can operate this kind of monster.

China can build the 100k tons civilian ship several decades ago, but look what we are now.

The Arleigh Burke Flight IIA costs 2 billion USD per ship, while the future Flight III may cost close to 4 billion USD per ship.

Sure you want to bankrupt yourself with that tiny economy, don't you?

No, we don´t need monster carrier, but rather light carrier class such as that of Japan´s Izumo.

Should the US lift embargo, they can start to transfer the 6 patrol aircrafts P-3 as Vietnam has requested.
Should Vietnam decide to jump into the US camp, they probably sell the Aegis at a friendship price.

Asitimes: US mulls P-3 MPA sale to Vietnam

 

[TheTruth]

You would lose badly in an arms race with China, feel free to do what you want.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

No, we don´t need monster carrier, but rather light carrier class such as that of Japan´s Izumo.

Should the US lift embargo, they can start to transfer the 6 patrol aircrafts P-3 as Vietnam has requested.
Should Vietnam decide to jump into the US camp, they probably sell the Aegis at a friendship price.

Asitimes: US mulls P-3 MPA sale to Vietnam

2 billion per Aegis ship is the price for the US Navy, while exporting to the foreign nations would be even higher.

 

[Genesis]

Btw, if any chinamen is wondering, Viet Nam was looking to buy radars and anti-aircraft system from the U.S

Don't bring up the US like it's some sort of God.

Our FD-2000 system won the Turkey tender, it's also being exported to a few other markets in Asia, including ASEAN nations and south asian nations. IF Africa had money they buy it too.

But the thing is that's not the best China has, aside from that's not as good as HQ-9 to begin with, China is starting to deploy a upgraded version as well, so in terms of anti air, China is not behind the US. But the US also doesn't worry too much for defensive capabilities.

As to Radars, we have been up there with US, Israel for a few years now, nothing the US throw at you will surprise us.


We are not Cambodia, where if US helps you they are toast. We are a potential super power making equal or better equipments than the US.


As to Aegis ships, our Type 52D is better than all current Burke class minus III, where the III is bigger by a lot. Type 55 will be better than all Burkes period.

So unless the US sells you Zumwalt, you still don't have a technological advantage.

 

[ViXuyen]

Don't bring up the US like it's some sort of God.

Our FD-2000 system won the Turkey tender, it's also being exported to a few other markets in Asia, including ASEAN nations and south asian nations. IF Africa had money they buy it too.

But the thing is that's not the best China has, aside from that's not as good as HQ-9 to begin with, China is starting to deploy a upgraded version as well, so in terms of anti air, China is not behind the US. But the US also doesn't worry too much for defensive capabilities.

As to Radars, we have been up there with US, Israel for a few years now, nothing the US throw at you will surprise us.


We are not Cambodia, where if US helps you they are toast. We are a potential super power making equal or better equipments than the US.


As to Aegis ships, our Type 52D is better than all current Burke class minus III, where the III is bigger by a lot. Type 55 will be better than all Burkes period.

So unless the US sells you Zumwalt, you still don't have a technological advantage.

Don't bring up the US like it's some sort of God.

Our FD-2000 system won the Turkey tender, it's also being exported to a few other markets in Asia, including ASEAN nations and south asian nations. IF Africa had money they buy it too.

But the thing is that's not the best China has, aside from that's not as good as HQ-9 to begin with, China is starting to deploy a upgraded version as well, so in terms of anti air, China is not behind the US. But the US also doesn't worry too much for defensive capabilities.

As to Radars, we have been up there with US, Israel for a few years now, nothing the US throw at you will surprise us.


We are not Cambodia, where if US helps you they are toast. We are a potential super power making equal or better equipments than the US.


As to Aegis ships, our Type 52D is better than all current Burke class minus III, where the III is bigger by a lot. Type 55 will be better than all Burkes period.

So unless the US sells you Zumwalt, you still don't have a technological advantage.

Rubbish, the U.S is not God but they're way ahead of you souper bowa.

Viet Nam does not need to spend a fortune to build up a deterence against you guys. Our future anti-air in the next 5-10 years will be based on the S-400, S-350E Vityaz, and the Su-35. I'm willing to bet that the IRBIS-E radar of the Su35 (despite having a huge RCS) is more than enough to detect your junk-20 finishes it off before the junk-20 can do anything. Heck, we already have a massive network of mobile radars already, In the case that we might buy the F-15 Silent Eagle, I'm willing to bet the same scenario with the Su-35 when dealing with your junk-20

Aegis ship won't do us good at the price of more than a billion. I'm willing to bet once we are done with the 6 Kilo-class subs, there will be more orders on another batch of subs. Subs will be more effective in term of "guerilla" at sea than having a huge fortress on the sea surface ready to face massive anti-ship missiles from air, surface, sub-surface( something we can do to you guys at the moment). So relax about us having an Aegis ship or carrier. Viet Nam does not have oversea interest to protect. Our furthest interest is 800 km away from shore. All we need to spend is a drop in the bucket to build up a sizeable airforce, sub force, and surface combatants that can launch anti-ship missiles.

Your Beidou satellite is useless btw. The thing can't even detect the wreckage of the Malaysian Airlines (carrying mostly Chinese) almost a day after it was downed in the middle of a pond. The thing can't even detect oil slick 10 by 6 miles either, what a joke. Do those first before talking about detecting our troop location/movement or SAM sites, decoy sites etc.

 

[senheiser]

US 'may ease' export restrictions against Myanmar and Vietnam if human rights concerns are addressed


Jon Grevatt, Bangkok - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
23 February 2014

The United States' efforts to expand security relationships across the Asia-Pacific could lead to Washington easing long-standing arms embargoes on Myanmar and Vietnam, Kenneth Handelman, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Defense Trade Controls in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs has told IHS Jane's .

At present, Handelman said, military sales to both Myanmar and Vietnam are unlikely but could be possible in the future should both countries move to address issues such as human rights concerns.

In 2013 the US and the EU both eased trade and investment restrictions on Myanmar in light of its efforts towards political reform.

US 'may ease' export restrictions against Myanmar and Vietnam if human rights concerns are addressed - IHS Jane's 360



That is clearly a hint for Vietnam.

America and Vietnam can work out a solution so that both sides can save face...and voilà, moderrn destroyers, submarines and stealth fighter jets can be bought from Uncle Sam.

why youre asking your self not why there are export restriction from your american friend in the first place?

 

[EastSea]

why youre asking your self not why there are export restriction from your american friend in the first place?

US is counterpart, not friend like Russia.

You could ask why US is interfered in to Self determination of Crime people.

Slaves don't question their masters

Taiwan is master of US and Taiwan could ask US to buy every Hi-tech weapons from them.

You have also problem with your English grammar.

 

[Genesis]

Rubbish, the U.S is not God but they're way ahead of you souper bowa.

Viet Nam does not need to spend a fortune to build up a deterence against you guys. Our future anti-air in the next 5-10 years will be based on the S-400, S-350E Vityaz, and the Su-35. I'm willing to bet that the IRBIS-E radar of the Su35 (despite having a huge RCS) is more than enough to detect your junk-20 finishes it off before the junk-20 can do anything. Heck, we already have a massive network of mobile radars already, In the case that we might buy the F-15 Silent Eagle, I'm willing to bet the same scenario with the Su-35 when dealing with your junk-20

Aegis ship won't do us good at the price of more than a billion. I'm willing to bet once we are done with the 6 Kilo-class subs, there will be more orders on another batch of subs. Subs will be more effective in term of "guerilla" at sea than having a huge fortress on the sea surface ready to face massive anti-ship missiles from air, surface, sub-surface( something we can do to you guys at the moment). So relax about us having an Aegis ship or carrier. Viet Nam does not have oversea interest to protect. Our furthest interest is 800 km away from shore. All we need to spend is a drop in the bucket to build up a sizeable airforce, sub force, and surface combatants that can launch anti-ship missiles.

Your Beidou satellite is useless btw. The thing can't even detect the wreckage of the Malaysian Airlines (carrying mostly Chinese) almost a day after it was downed in the middle of a pond. The thing can't even detect oil slick 10 by 6 miles either, what a joke. Do those first before talking about detecting our troop location/movement or SAM sites, decoy sites etc.

US is ahead of China in many fields, both numerically and technologically, but certain fields they are not. Not because they can't but because unlike Vietnam they are never fighting a defensive war, at least not any time soon.

US airforce can dominate the skys, they don't even conisder anti air that vital.

As to Russia, we have about equal air defense equipments, the S-400 project, we had a big stake, turned out the Russians hoodwinked us, but we still got some good experience and tech out of it. They are still better, but it's a difference between Toyota and Nissan rather than Lambo and Ford.



IRBIS-E is PESA, not sure you know the difference between PESA and AESA, but current Chinese fighters like J-10B, J-11B, J-16, J-15 all have AESA, these are all in production fighters.

But let's just say, while the J-116 is not better than Su-35, in terms of radar it is and a few other areas.

If you think Su-35, Silent Eagle can deal with J-20, then I can't really argue, much like I can't argue with someone who says a Viper is better than Gallardo.


Subs are effective, but China has 24 Type 54a, and 20 type 56, to go with future plans of further improvements, that started this year.

By the way we also have 60 Subs that can be used for anti submarine warefare.

C919- will be ready before the end of the decade, and so will come with anti sub warefare equipments. Current speculations are that it will equal American's newest anti sub plane. Not a major accomplishment as it will be about a decade later, but it's effect is for all to see.

Vietnamese subs are too little in number and tech to matter.

Don't compare warship tech to us, it's an insult. Our flag ship isn't a corvette.


Lol, I won't even dignify the Beidou thing with a response since you obviously don't know how these things work.

 

[BoQ77]

If you think Su-35, Silent Eagle can deal with J-20, then I can't really argue, much like I can't argue with someone who says a Viper is better than Gallardo.

I'm confusing when a guy compare an immature aircraft like J-20 to Su-35 an aircraft developed from Su-27 that prove the endurance for decades.

Even current in mission F18, Su27, Su30, F16, Su35 , F22 ... they should be careful to compare ...


I don't know which is the predecessor of J-20 ? in your opinion ?
or it was developed from nothing ?

Too early for telling anything. Let it grow, don't put heavy pressure on it ... because the J20 development project even could be stopped if its performance and budget for it are not matched.

 

[Mighty Caty]

I found it really funny people here tend to oversimplify war and only think of one side - Equipment.

All the time I have heard that My Aircraft is better than you so you should submit, or my ship, my tank or my whatever.

To a military, equipment is only a small part of equation in any war, a small part, and indeed, a war is fought easier if you have more advance equipment, but equipment of all sort can only give you a slight edge, and war have been and always had been fought with superior tactics and strategy, it does not matter you are fighting a war in Napoleon time to gulf war, it is not because of the advance technological edge that win the war, rather how and the mean people fight the war decided the outcome.

I can give you alien weapon, advance information access, however, if you don't know how to use it and did not build a doctrine around it, you will and can lose to anyone with a stick and shield

 

[bolo]

I found it really funny people here tend to oversimplify war and only think of one side - Equipment.

All the time I have heard that My Aircraft is better than you so you should submit, or my ship, my tank or my whatever.

To a military, equipment is only a small part of equation in any war, a small part, and indeed, a war is fought easier if you have more advance equipment, but equipment of all sort can only give you a slight edge, and war have been and always had been fought with superior tactics and strategy, it does not matter you are fighting a war in Napoleon time to gulf war, it is not because of the advance technological edge that win the war, rather how and the mean people fight the war decided the outcome.

I can give you alien weapon, advance information access, however, if you don't know how to use it and did not build a doctrine around it, you will and can lose to anyone with a stick and shield

But China military leaders know how to operate warfare. Having superior weaponry is a priority. China is not Iraq.

 

[Mighty Caty]

But China military leaders know how to operate warfare. Having superior weaponry is a priority. China is not Iraq.

is it or isn't it?

The expand of Chinese military is not aimed the same as the goal they used to have, the expand comes with a break through in mind. However, the PLA have 0 experience on fighting an aggressive warfare with modern weaponry. The same goes with Vietnam and much about most country in Asia region.

If you had studied Military Strategy and Tactics. There are no much strategy or tactics one can use to start an offensive, which mean you are actively engaging another military. The reason why this happened simply because when you are attacking, you are actually at the weakest when you attack, and any wrong move would create a major military blunder and usually resulting in a military disaster.

The key for PLA is to understand the stuff they are getting, which is both a brand new item and a brand new concept to them, while PLA need to build a weapon doctrine around the new weapon. The current level as far as I can see is Chinese simply adopt other countries doctrine and tactics, mostly because Chinese themselves have been copying other military equipment without a basic understanding of what they are for. Now I am not saying these copying won't work, but one need to know, who know better than the equipment you copy from? Do you really think Chinese will know better than the country that equipment they copy from? Which some member here seems to think so...

For example, Chinese operate on a US Fleet Model when Chinese mold over their own Carrier Battle Group. From the standard compliment to standard operating procedure. However, US derived those model is for US Navy, which for all intents and purposes serve US interest and not Chinese interest. It operate on US water with US operation, not according to the need of Chinese Operation. Hence when time comes there is a different between US and China about a single mission, the doctrine may not be useful, even harmful to Chinese military.

Instead of Producing Advance weaponry in a massive rate, China should stop and think how to use them to their advantage, which I illustrate by raising this question, What type of Military Doctrine Chinese invented since their formation in 1949? You have German with blitzkrieg, aerial combat warfare, Russian with Massive man power, anti-0submarine warfare, US with advance technological and communication warfare, intelligence warfare and carrier warfare Vietnam wrote the book on asymmetrical warfare, French wrote the book on cavalry charge, British wrote the naval doctrine. And as far as I can see, Chinese wrote none of those. And this is what they should do, otherwise the Chinese would always be adapting how other's fight, and I can tell you this, this is not good on a military point of view