chinaj31stealth-1362603329

Sun Tzu said: Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.

WASHINGTON: Because China believes it is much weaker than the United States, they are more likely to launch a massive preemptive strike in a crisis. Here’s the other bad news: The current US concept for high-tech warfare, known as Air-Sea Battle, might escalate the conflict even further towards a “limited” nuclear war, says one of the top American experts on the Chinese military.

[This is one in an occasional series on the crucial strategic relationship and the military capabilities of the US, its allies and China.]

What US analysts call an “anti-access/area denial” strategy is what China calls “counter-intervention” and “active defense,” and the Chinese appraoch is born of a deep sense of vulnerability that dates back 200 years, China analyst Larry Wortzel said at the Institute of World Politics: “The People’s Liberation Army still sees themselves as an inferior force to the American military, and that’s who they think their most likely enemy is.”

That’s fine as long as it deters China from attacking its neighbors. But if deterrence fails, the Chinese are likely to go big or go home. Chinese military history from the Korean War in 1950 to the Chinese invasion of Vietnam in 1979 to more recent, albeit vigorous but non-violent, grabs for the disputed Scarborough Shoal suggests a preference for a sudden use of overwhelming force at a crucial point, what Clausewitz would call the enemy’s “center of gravity.”

Comments

  • FormerDirtDart

    “Yellow Peril”
    Get a grip

    • Mike

      Thanks for your service,(Airborne)!….

  • Asian Conscience

    Cant believe I read that. Another doomsday cultist. I wonder what he sees every time he opens his window in the morning. Pretty impressive in terms of details but surprisingly, he left the economic aspect of warfare out.

    • Temujins

      Economic aspect? China is expendable with India, Indonesia, Vietnam, and others are hungry and ready to replace china.

      • Bobserver

        Sour grapes. The time for Mongol superiority faded a long time ago.
        India did not have her country devastated like China was during WWII and was relatively better off per capita than the P. R. of China until the 1970s. China still went further ahead and still up till today. Neither of those countries you mentioned will achieve in the next 30 years what China did ithe in the previous.30 years. That was a one-time event for an unusual country, government and the opportunities provided by the times.

      • allbuss84

        it would take years to replace china as a manufacturing center. US industry would freeze within months without new parts flowing in from china’s plants

      • Asian Conscience

        No, you didnt understand me. I meant the economic warfare between US and China not those other small dogs in the pit

    • BD92110

      Yeah, I’m surprised this wasn’t mentioned.
      If China was willing to take the economic and financial hit, as a “cost of war,” they could dump their US Treasury holdings and cause significant economic chaos as US interests spike. It woul dhit Chinese exporters to the US hard, but considering that the economic costs to China’s exporters would also be huge if there was a shooting war affecting trade, it would be a heck of a “first strike.”
      It would be interesting how such games could play into a scenario.

      • Asian Conscience

        Yeah BD, with you completely. US already short on cash with trillions of dollars in debt as it is. It simply cant afford to cut trade with a major trade partner that is greasing the cogs that is already in bad need of repairs. If we think for a minute US decides to declare martial law and freeze all loans to fund a War scale effort against China – consider its effect on it S&P rating, global reputation and currency value …hell it will cause nothing short of a global riot considering how many countries holds USD bonds still as FX reserves. Besides domestically, Wall Street bankers will probably get pretty militant at the very thought the government will do something that catastrophically stupid and we might even get another civil war in addition to WW3. As for China, if US goes down, its exports and those debts will scar its economy to an unsustainable level. The economic horror of that is just the tip of the iceberg and I am barely scratching surface…But then again that is, if US nukes and Russian/China response didnt kill everyone in the world first.

      • Swiftright Right

        In the face of a massive economic attack like that we would freeze their assets and null and void American debts to China. I think it would hurt them way more then it would hurt us.

        Also in the case of a Sino-American war it better be over fast since China depends of the American breadbasket for food. Not have Chinese industrial products would suck for us, Not having food would be way way worse for them.

  • Temujins

    It is better to have powerful friends and allies: Japan and others must possess the capabilities to coordinate and retaliate deep inside china both conventional and nuclear if china provoke wars. China cannot be trust and its no first use nuclear is a fantasy.

    • http://john101b.ipage.com/globalwarming/climatechange.html Jack Everett —– Mato

      You forget that China has a powerful ally in Russia for defense.

      • Araya

        With the difference what the Russian will don exactly nothing them China starts a war against Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the USA. Because why them the USS and the China fight to the death, the Russian can after claim he World for there self with other Word’s they get what the USSR has seek the entire time of is existence the world domination and this is the same what Vladimir Putin and is comrade dream for since the USSR broke apart . So Russia will standing beside it and watch and only support the Red Chinese with Anti-Western Propaganda and intelligence possible also with weapons but not with troops. In compare to what the USA, Taiwan, Japan and also likely South Korea will have to fight the Communists because why they will be attacked form the first hour of the War. The best think what the USA can do is to get also a Military Presence in India how is also an likely adversary of Red China. Them the USA and there Friend’s stand united the Chinese Communist will go to hell in a War even them they took a preemptive strike.

        And what means the efficient of this Chinese Non-Nuclear first strike so it will be likely devastating but not an instant kill for any of the US Ally’s in the region. So even Taiwan should be able to provide a serious resistance against the Chinese Invasion on is Coast. So probably around 1500 Missiles will hit Taiwan and as consequence the Taiwanese Air force will be eliminated like all Command Post and Fix Air defense and Anti Ship sides with exception of the Jiashan Underground Airbase and the infrastructure also severely damaged. And in South Korea the situation will look like the same them the North Koreans the only real Ally of the Chinese Communist’s are involved in the War. But Japan will in compare to Taiwan and South Korea suffer much lesser damage because why Red China and Nord Koreans simply didn’t have enough convectional missiles to attack Taiwan, South Korea and Japan and aditionaly the US Military Sides at the same time. For example the most Chinese Missiles how targeting Taiwan cannot reach form there locations Japan or South Korea and the Nord Korean Missiles are in compare to the Chinese models extremely inaccurate. The least hit target should be Guam and Singapore because why China has only around 50 Convetional Missiles how can reach this US Military sides. As consequence even in the best outcome the Chinese first strike will be not enough to decide the War in there favor and this are good news.

        And After the Attack the Chinese will also had fired their largest part of there long range ammunition and the damage one the most US and Japanese Military Sides specially one runways should be relatively fast repaired to allowed a counterattack form them. So a Air field is much harder to destroy them a carrier because why it can not be sunken and holes and crater can be repaired fast even in hours if it necessary. Only the Fighter and Ammunition Depots are problematic them they are not hardened against missiles attacks unfortunately like nearly all Military Sides on Allied side In the Pacific. I saw what Guam should be partially hardened against Missiles strikes and I hope what the Japanese and South Koreans will do the same in the future with there important Military Sides.

        • Peter_T

          Given how China’s relationship with Taiwan and South Korea improved greated in the recent years, your scenario likely won’t happen.

          • Araya

            Hi Peter_T, my scenario will happen them China decide to make a preventive attack automatically. It is really simple because why them Red China decide to conquer Taiwan or the contested Japanese territory and they also make the decision what they need to a preventive attack in order to achieve there targets they will have to attack at last all US-Bases in the Region. With other Words China will have to fire Thousands of Missile’s on South Korea, Japan and Guam and also on there main target Taiwan and under such condition the South Koreans and Japanese will have no option them to defend there Country against the incoming attacks. Or you really believe what any Country In this world will keep still them his own territory is devastating by an massive enemy attack ? And them China decide to attack only is main target Taiwan so he will risk what the USA will simply use there large Narine and Air bases in South Korea and Japan as unsinkable aircraft carrier in order to stop the Chinese Invasion in the Taiwan Street.

            And what means the “improve” relations between Japan and China so this is already a think of the past how was mainly a project of the DPJ Party how lose is power just 2 Years after they was elected and the new Prime Minister of Japan Shinzō Abe from the LPD is a conservative politician how see Red China as Japans Main Adversary and already took a lot of moves to provoke Red China. So the Japanese-Sino relation’s are one a historical low point at the moment and what means South Korea hear is the situation is also comparable because why the recent Nord Korea Aggression has intensified and the South Korean Government is the same Conservative government how stand firm on Bush side all the time. Only Taiwan has improved is relationship with Red China but as response the Chinese has just further increased the number of the Missile’s how target Taiwan directly and as response the Taiwanese has started to build now there own long range missiles system against the Red Chinese so also this relationship worsens from day to day. And what means other Nation like the Philippines, Vietnam, Singapore or Australia so all of them has suffer in the recent time Chinese provocations and seek US Help. So Australia has just now get a new Prime Minister how seeks to increase the Australian Military Budget and to improve the Military alliance with the USA as consequence of the Chinese buildup. And in Singapore the USA has now a Marine base and the Singapore also improve is defense against a Chinese Aggression like the Communists State Vietnam how improves ins Maritime and Air force in order to deter a potential Chinese Aggression. And the Indians has just started 2 weeks ago two long-range Nuclear capable Missile’s and proclaimed happy to the media what they can now reach Peking ! With other Words I see no Chinese Friend’s in the Region with exception of the Stalinist Nord Korea and Pakistan (the mortal enemy of India) because why even Burma has begun to distanced from Red China and to improve is relation’s with the USA.

          • Peter_T

            Please read carefully that I wrote previously improved relations with South Korea and Taiwan, NOT Japan.
            Again your scenario hinges on preemptive attack without war declaration first and thinking that CHina would copy USA on this. Very thin assumption if you haven’t study Chinese military strategy right now.
            Your “Taiwan” retort is very thin. Sure China produced more missiles in Southern China but no one can prove they are locked on Taiwan, only more are there. Also you have not seen news of economic cooperation between them or diplomatic cooperation between them but only forcus on number of missiles and Taiwan’s long range missile development? Very naive view.
            Vietnam relies on China for economic assistance or they will be get ultra-high inflation (you haven’t checked this haven’t you?) no matter how many planes it purchased.
            Singapore playing both sides (China and USA) for their own survival (you haven’t read what they constantly said to China right?).
            Austrialia incoming PM also said very important relationship with China economically and diplomatically despite allowing USA to establish a base. They are playing both sides for their own benefits.
            India had proclaimed this after a AGNIS V. So what? They always hype very loud, do very little. If you read the test and the current capability of AGNIS V, it is nothing special. However, only their media and some irresponsible India commander proclaimed this, their heads of government had kept cool about it since they are smart.
            Burma is trying to level the playing field which nothing wrong with that. But still, they rely on CHina to rein in northern separatists from making too much noise as well as economic development (albeit fairer to the locals).
            So it is funny that you can point these things out without looking deeper and broader at the entire picture. Shows how far you still have to go in strategy and planning.

          • Araya

            Hi Peter_T first let be serious, everybody knows well why all nation in the Pacific are in panic from India over Vietnam to South Korea, Japan to Singapore and Australia and buildup there military and seek also a closer millitary relationship with the USA, the answer is just one Word “China”.

            And what means Taiwan’s attempt to build is own long range missiles force one of some article about.

            http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/taiwan-develops-medium-range-missile-report-343366

            And India is not just praise there new ICBM they prepare there entire Armed Forces for a conflict with China and is Ally Pakistan. The Indian General has just say what everybody know and this is the fact what China and India are Geopolitically enemy’s how already had fight against each other. Them you look one the Indian Military Build-up there primary enemy is not Pakistan but Red China. India didn’t need for example a 5 Generation Fighter, Strategic Air and Missile defense Systems and a large Navy how will include 3 Carriers, Nuclear Submarine’s and an advanced ASW Force or Nuclear Missile’s how can reach Beijing to deter Pakistan.

            And now to the different Scenarios, the first strike scenario is the same what is descripted in the Article so I take it because why it is also my opinion why it is the most likely because why it has have the best chances to succeed for the Chinese Communists in the moment. The alternative Scenario what Red China declares at first War and start and Invasion on Taiwan or Japan (the likely targets) is more favorable for the USA because why they can so alert, prepare and concentrate there Forces. As consequence Red China will have from the beginning of the conflict not only to fight against the Armed force of there victim and also against a surged US Force how is also not weakened by a preventive attack like in the Article-Scenario. With other Words it get much harder for the Chinese to reach there targets (for example to conquer Taiwan or the contested Japanese Islands). So under your Scenario the Chinese force will be likely even sunk in the Taiwan Street before they can put one Food one land.

            So It makes sense for the Chinese to strike first because why they are in the weaker position so it is just logic for them. And an first strike Scenario how also involved there Stalinist friends in North Korea make also sense because why it will overstrain the US Forces and eliminated at last a large part of there forward deployed Force’s for example the strong Fighter Groups on Okinawa,South Korea and Guam (some F22 are under them) and also a large part of the 7 US Fleet how is based in Japan.

            And what means the Chinese Missile’s so it is well know how the largest part is stationed and this is the Taiwan Street the estimation are so high as 1600 Missiles. Them Red China starts now to move all this Missiles in other region for example one the Japanese See they will be likely detected by the US, Taiwanese and Japanese Intelligence. And what means the impact of this 1600 Missiles so I’m not really concerned about them because why them they are all fired the party is over for the communist’s.

            So the DF-11 (CSS-7) has a operational range of 300 to 800 kilometer (DF-11A) and can deliver up to 800 Kg like a large US JDAM Bomb and the PLA has about 600 of them with other words the massive Chinese missile strike will have the impact of around 1600 JDAMs on the enemy to compare the USA has received around 250.000 JDAM-Kits in 2013.

            Hear the Link

            http://www.deagel.com/news/JDAM-Weapon-Program-Reaches-250000-Kit-Milestone_n000011820.aspx

            A US-Fighter like the F18E/F can deliver peer Mission up to 8,000 kg of payload to the target and a F15E can deliver up to 36 SDBs peer Mission. A B2 Spirit can hypnotically deliver even 216 peer Mission with other Words just 8 B2 alone can strike more targets them the entire PLA Arsenal of short range missiles. Now you will argue what Red China has a nearly unbeatable Air defense but the point is what the US force didn’t must attack Chinese territory to win they just must stop the Chinese attempt to conquer there Targets.

      • Bhess

        The only thing Russia will do is wait and see how much Chinese territory they can grab once the PLA is occupied. The Chinese have a lot more to worry about from the Russians than from the U.S.

        • http://john101b.ipage.com/globalwarming/climatechange.html Jack Everett —– Mato

          You would like that but you better hope they never have to use their mutual defense treaty.

        • Araya

          Not really the Russian rule already over a underpopulated country for example in the entire Asiatic Part of Russia just 10 Million Russian lives. In compare one the Russian Chinese Boarder live around 300 Million Chinese just take Google earth and take a look along the Amur River and you will see what the Russian have to be worried about a Chinese attack not the Chinese.

          The PLA is already superior to the Russian Army and only the 9000 Russian Nuclear Warheads and Ivan’s will to use them has probably deter Red China to occupy Siberia with all is natural resources until now. So them you talk with Russian Military’s so they will mostly speak about the “Yellow threat” one there Far Eastern Boarder them about the US missiles defense in East Europe. Just one of the reasons why I can only laugh about the “Sino-Russian alliance”.

  • Peace

    China is not an enemy. The west forced China to open, so that we could trade with them. Now we are trading. China and the US are working together since Nixon. Just read Diplomacy, by Henry Kissinger.

    • Mike

      Horse Crap…. Does the saying, “I fear that we have awaken a sleeping giant” come to mind? I’m hoping it has Nixon and those that thought they could personally profit by moving thousands of good Middle Class jobs from America to China, rolling over in their graves, just as the same past treasons of their Fathers and Grandfathers perpetrated before WW-ll!… :(

      • Peter_T

        You realize that after Nixon, all other presidents continued to do this? So Reagan, George H Bush, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and right now Obama are all treasonous?

        • Mike

          It was all part of the Conservative ultra Wealthy cycle, similar to the 1920′s….. Finally it all blew up (1929 and 2007) and the it was the average citizen, the voters that brought an end to it all. In 1932 when they elected FDR and in 2008 they elected Obama… The citizens have have had enough of the ruinous rule of the CUWs and are once again taking action…. Surprisingly, more and more consumers are demanding products “Made In America” and that is the beginning of another cycle where the government returns to the average citizen and away from the CUWs…. Believe it or not, but you might at least want to observe… and participate, because if your neighbor has a job, it greatly improves the probability that you will also, aye?

          • Peter_T

            Surprisingly, more and more consumers are demanding products “Made In America”? Not really as middle class shrinks while lower class expands, more and more wants cheaper products. Now that CHina is not that cheap anymore, more will look for other 3rd world products. These consumers you are talking about are more upper middle class which is a small number + some purely out of patriotism.
            “government returns to the average citizen”? Those only existed in the early America history. After the Civil War, such things became rarer and rarer after each major war we took. It took us citizens how long to get women to vote? To give blacks their rights?
            You are talking about jobs in the last couple of sentences. So Obama had 5 years, where are the jobs? Our superficial official count is still above 7% while by strict counting is still over 15%. So again, where does it show you that “government returns to the average citizen”? Democrats only had the super majority for 2 years before Republicans took the House back. In these 2 years, two major things, economic stimulus which fell flat (dubbed the slowest recovery since the 1930′s), and Obamacare. But I digress, since both of us went off topic long time ago.

            To your “I fear that we have awaken a sleeping giant”. Unless you think Chinese people should be forever kept out the world dominated by the West, such introduction is necessary between China and USA in the 1970′s to work against USSR. That sentence along shows how much you fear the Chinese people because you have no clue who they are and what they want beside information gleamed from a few ignorant xenophobic news media.

          • Mike

            Peter T,
            Do you live in America? Your knowledge of the 1930′s seems a little suspect…. China would still be back shoveling donkey dung if Nixon and some of the wealthiest in this country had not thought they could go to China and make a killing on the backs of American labor….. The Chinese government let that go on only long enough for them to be able to copy our methods, then they copied our factories and refused to re-license those that were there…. If you can find a copy of “The Bear And The Dragon” wherever you live, you might gain some insight, aye?Have you ever lived in America? Do you know how the Middle Class came about and prospered between 1932 and 1982? There is only so much they can teach you in schools outside of America….. Of course, the only problem with coming here, is that you probably won’t want to go back to wherever you live… I will worry about the future of America when people quit lining up at our Embassies and borders wanting to come here to live…

          • Peter_T

            yeah Mike, you need to brush up on CHina’s modern history of the 1970′s otherwise “shoveling donkey dung” is very embarrassing statement of your historic knowledge.

            What China did to copy, Japan did, South Korea did, Taiwan did, Singapore did, USA did, Europe did, etc.. General historic trend is the West copied the East and improved then invented more, then the East copies the West and improved and now begun to invent more. Easy to find all of this online. Trapped in Cold War knowledge and thinking pretty much narrows the limit of your understanding and viewpoints.

            Middle Class came to prosper because we used top-down economy with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and the emergence of the Robber Barons. Then it morphed by the creation of Bretton Woods system which empowered the West to continue its economic dominance of all others. It is due to the Bretton Woods system that our and Western European Middle Class prospered, not the superficial so-called “government returns to the average citizen”. Did you know that?
            And also there is only so much they will teach you in the public schools of America. Many info you have to do personal research and read tons of materials to find out.

          • Mike

            Peter T or whom ever you really are,
            In the U.S., we feel that is disrespectful to pose as someone else… If you had lived here you would know better why America prospered and Bretton Woods had little to do with America and more to do with rebuilding Europe and the rest of the world after WW-ll… The invasion of this site by those of you who aren’t who you say you are, is but another reason for us to suspect and be deeply concerned about China and it’s impact on the rest of the world in the years to come…….

          • Peter_T

            You have finally shown your true colors. Apparently you have reached your limits on intellectual debate and now, following our politician’s footsteps, begins character assassination and smearing. Suffice to say my middle, upper, and graduate education are from USA educational system. But I will not stoop to this new low level of yours and see no benefit revealing anymore personal information to you. Any further personal attacks not related to intellectual discussions will not get a reply from me.

            As for Bretton Woods, you said “[it] had little to do with America and more to do with rebuilding Europe and the rest of the world after WW-ll”. The part about rebuilding Europe and the rest of the world after WWII is true but also in this system, we forced Europeans to open their markets for exporting cheaper American products as well as making all exchange currencies to be based on the value of the Dollar (thus Dollar became the Reserve Currency of the World). Europe was closed to USA markets during the protectionism 1930′s , but after the war they need help from USA to rebuild. So Bretton Woods secured the prosperity of America post-war and its Middle Class with massive growth of exporting manufacturing goods thus created more jobs for our Middle Class and made us richer. Couple this with Reserve Currency status, of course our Middle Class had prospered during this time. Once again, it had little to do with your “government returns to the average citizen” which made us prosper post-WWII theory.

            I have now given my evidences by explaining what Bretton Woods system done to make a prosperous USA after WWII. Thus proven my previous argument. I ask you to please return to intellectual discussion and debate instead of more personal character smear.

          • Mike

            Did they not teach you about Kondrotiev’s Long Wave Theories in Gradate school? Were you a Business major? He was put to death by Stalin, another communist when, in 1923 he forecast the demise of the Soviet Union in the 1990′s… Therein is my response to “government returns returning to the average citizen” That said, did you grow up wealthy? Have you ever served in the American military? I must say, I am confused as you keep maintaining that you are an American Citizen, yet seem to know so little about the nuts and bolts of our system….

          • Peter_T

            I guess that’s the end of intellectual discussion since you rather continue on character attacks than actual fact debates. Your response to your own words “government returns returning to the average citizen” is hilarious. Perhaps you remember the context of which you wrote those words to me in the previous posts? But I digress as it seems you are out of intellectual responses but rather resorting to more baser ideological attacks of the Cold War era. In essence, you just proclaimed “I’m right, you are wrong, I know more than you” blah blah blah. Another analogy of your current attitude is “my way or the highway”.
            So further intellectual discourse is pointless as you have none to offer anymore. Good day to you sir.

          • Mike

            Since you refused to answer either of my questions, I am left to guess that you are neither, but rather some foreigner attempting to sound like an American. Incidentally, Comrade, we do not call each other “Sir” unless we are in our military and speaking to an officer. Oh, and the Cold War never ended as now we have a new “Enemy”… Enjoy your noodles!… :(

          • Peter_T

            I believe I already wrote previously that I will not answer personal questions? But of course you continue to ask and then blame me for not answering. Truly you have learned how politicians debates. You can guess all you want, label me all you want, in the end, it only proves you are still dwelling in past (and relishing it) and rather use smearing to prove your points rather than actual debate. Call you “sir” is me trying to be polite but of course if you want pick bones even toward that, I can call you much worst things. Then again, I already wrote I will not stoop to your level of mind fossilization .

          • Mike

            “Personal” about asking if you are an “American Citizen”… :) Bye Comrade!… What a joke… You other guys following this?

  • Bobserver

    The USA can’t even sort out for Americans the GFC mess that they and Wall Street caused nor can they brow-beat Middle East towel-heads or poverty sticken N. Koreans into compliance. What do you think of the US Administration’s chances of getting the analysis and response correct in a head-to-head confrontation with a chip-on-the-shoulder China???

  • Borisglebsk

    Wow 100-150 hours a month that’s awesome, but untrue. I think he said 100-150 hours a year for pilots. Might want to check that fact. NATO standard is 180 hours a year.

    • Peter_T

      Chinese pilots is over 200+ a year in recent years as it ramps up production of its 4th gen (3rd gen in the West) airforces.

    • Aaron_Burr

      Can’t imagine the Chinese fighter pilots get 100-150 hours of training flights a month. As a practical matter, high performance fighters typically need at least 8-10 hours of maintenance per flight hour. Back when dinosaurs ruled the earth (and sky!) when we were deployed to WESTPAC we rarely got in more than 50-60 hours per month (maybe 15-20, 3 hour sorties); somewhat more during heavy ops, less when not deployed. Lots of other squadron duties besides flying. Typically log 1,000-1,200 flight hours in a three year squadron rotation. Minimums for proficiency used to be 10 hours/month in type.

  • XSANDIEGOCA

    Pearl Harbor II is very much a possibility.

    • Taishanese

      Alot of people use many of today’s events as a prediction to a prelude to another Pearl Harbor.

      The reality is, there was a significant build up in Japan throughout the decade prior to Pearl Harbor (this is why Japan was able to defeat the US Navy for the first 6 months of the war even though the US at that time had an economy 16 times larger).

      Japan invaded Manchuria 10 years before Pearl Harbor and began an all out assault on China 4 years before Pearl Harbor. After Pearl Harbor, Japan did an all out and rapid assault on Asia. Something they could not have done unless they spent the decade prior to preparing for war.

      China on the other hand, is not preparing for such an assault. Not even close. Lets take a look at some simple facts.

      The US has the largest Navy in the world displacing 3 1/2 million tons. Yet, Chinese steel production, which is by far and away the largest produces over 700 million tons a year and will soon break 800 million tons.

      Yet, the Chinese navy in no way reflect this steel capacity.

      During WWII, the US Navy sank 8 million tons of Japanese merchant marine vessels. Yet Japanese steel production at that time was only 10 million tons a year. This gives you an idea how much Japan was ready for war. US submarines sank 700,000 tons of Japanese naval vessels, which represent 30% of the Japanese navy. So, that means Japan’s navy, at that time displaced over 2.3 million tons. This from a country that only produced 10 million tons of steel per year.

      I don’t know what China’s naval displacement is, but if the US today is 3 1/2 million tons, then China’s is much less. And it is a country that produces 70 times as much steel per year as what Japan produced per year prior to and during WWII.

      There is no effort underway in China for an all out war. The numbers speak for themselves.

      • Bhess

        And from what I’ve read recently is that the Chinese nuke subs are on par with Soviet 80′s Akulas right now as far as the tech goes.

        • Taishanese

          Yes, I’ve read that too, that China’s subs are comparable to older Soviet designs. And in terms of quantity of a particular type of sub, China does not have as many SSBN’s as Russia currently has (the others, I don’t know what the numerical differences are, but for the SSBN’s, Russia has more). Yet China’s economy is 5 times larger than Russia’s. And by 2030, China’s economy will be over 10 times larger than Russia’s.

          I suspect, by 2030, while China will narrow the nuclear gap with Russia, Russia will still have more nuclear bombs and delivery systems than China. Russia’s overall nuclear system was built during a time when the old Soviet Union put all or most of their resources towards military. And the legacy of that is what we have today in Russia.

          What will likely happen, is that China, spending 2-3% a year on defense, and with the sheer size of her growing economy, over the course of the next several decades, will close the gap with Russia on nuclear forces. China’s 2-3% per year won’t equal the US 4% a year until her economy is roughly twice the size of the US and that likely won’t happen until about 2035 or so. And even then a couple more decades at that level to build the overall conventional forces that the US has or will have (assuming no significant budget cuts in the US defense til then).

          The reason why it is going to take so long to reach parity with Russia in nukes and the US in conventional, is that unlike Japan in the 1930′s or Germany in the 1930′s, there isn’t a national effort in China to direct the nation’s entire industries towards war production. Despite increasing defense spending in China.

          So, when people talk of another Pearl Harbor, I just have to roll my eyes.

          • GoNavy

            I suspect China is currently undergoing rapid modernization of their submarine programs.

            Notice they have not really ramped up production.

            They currently come out with models, test them, go back and redesign and iterate this cycle.

            Once China develops a 1st class submarine they will ramp up production.

          • Bhess

            The U.S. makes a lot of stuff look easy. We have maintained a tradition and tech in our navy. To start basically from square one China has a lot of learning to do. They can get the tech together faster but to be able to run nuke subs and carriers takes a lot of know how they don’t have and will take years to develop.
            China will put money in their military but I think they’ll be more focused on developing their economy and raising their world image than trying to start military conflicts. Their government isn’t the most stable so it’s not a sure thing but the most likely prospect.

          • GoNavy

            We in the west like to talk about how “unstable” china’s government is.

            Actually in many ways it is very stable. For one they have perhaps the most loved government in the world by the citizens they represent, at nearly a 90% approval rating from PEW. Secondly they have a unified government structured around one major party with several minor ones. Compare these to us in the USA. With our government approval rating coming in at 45-50% and politics so out of control we cannot even keep our government running and risk defaulting on out debt.

            I agree the PLAN will not be “carrier” ready for decades. They have allot of training to do. But they have had a submarine force for quite some time now and field more subs that we do here at home. While the quality is not up to par with us… that is why you see them make just a few iterations of each generation of new subs.

            I expect them to rapidly developing their sub fleet. And not doing the same intensive effort for a carrier Navy. You get more bang out of the buck with the subs.

          • useyourhead2

            The problem with China is that their ideology does not reward innovation. Yeah, they have sprouted a capitalist scion of sorts taking in work from the West to produce more cheaply, but largely they are the typical communist collective system.

            The farmer who gets out of bed to plow 10 acres of rice is going to get paid the same as the one who “fluffed off” and stayed in bed all day. The next day, guess what the guy who went out to work did?

            How many patents have they filed? They innovate the old fashion way: They steal it, which is why we are always finding them involved with industrial espionage as well as military espionage. They send their intelligence gathers to schools all over the world and they find their way into the Military Industrial Complex to see, learn, and steal for their country. But while you can steal all the blueprints and technology you want to build something, knowing how to use the product effectively and why is not as easy.

            But really, what are their motivations to conquer the world when they basically already have without firing a shot? They have stolen the world’s manufacturing base by manipulating their currency and blinding the West and their capitalists to that ultimate goal with cheap prices. The only item that one may see is to have more land to provide a living space for an ever expanding population to live. Yet, they have apparently been successful in stemming their population growth with statist policies to limit births.

          • Taishanese

            Even if China does develop a first class submarine, any build up would be to a level that is commensurate with peace time numbers rather than war time numbers.

            And yes, no point in building alot of subs if they aren’t very modern.

            But a nation intent on war builds large quantities with the technical level that they do have. During WWII, Japan’s carriers were not as big or as modern as American carriers, but they built all they could anyway. I believe they built 8.

          • ziggy1988

            You are Communist Chinese, so you clearly have an incentive to deny the Chinese military threat.

      • GoNavy

        Currently we should be concerned with Japan’s stockpiling of nuclear grade weapons material.

        I believe they have plans to develop nuclear weapons within a year after they fully turn on such a program.

        Now they are just preparing for the day.

        We should inspect and destroy such a program as I do not trust the Japanese based on their history.

        • Taishanese

          Certain countries, when they build nuclear weapons, receive different treatment from the global community. For example, India vs Iran/North Korea. The main reason is the rhetoric that comes out of countries like Iran and North Korea.

          Japan doesn’t have the rhetoric of a rogue country, but they can’t simply erase what happened back during WWII. Not enough time has passed to heal the wounds. So, if Japan does decide to build nuclear weapons, there will be no doubt repercussions. And not just from the US, but the rest of Asia would not tolerate it.

          As a minimum consequence, all defense treaties between the US and Japan should be severed.

          • e fung

            Already, Japan has 9.3 metric tons of plutonium stored at Rokkasho and nine other sites in the island nation. That’s enough to make an estimated 3,000 nuclear weapons, each with the explosive force of 20,000 tons of TNT.

        • Swiftright Right

          You believe? Japan has pretty much already stated that they have the material and industry to build a nuclear deterrent force in 3 months
          And you know what, Im cool with that. Japan is surrounded by aggressive nations with huge nuclear stockpiles all of which have at different points in the last 30 years stated they have the right to preemptively strike who ever they want. And then there is N Korea.

          And Taishanase what has Japan done that is any worse than its neighbors? The Soviets conducted “purges” that were easily on par with the Holocaust. The Chinese love to make hay over Japanese war crimes but ignore the fact they were trivial compared to Mao’s crimes against the Chinese people. The USA exterminated the populations of entire cities AND remains the only nation to have used atomic weapons on other humans.

          If Japan goes nuclear I would say we should cut them from the umbrella (there’s a term I dont use much anymore) but thats it.

      • ziggy1988

        Utter garbage. The PLAN today is more than capable of sinking the USN, especially its much-vaunted aircraft carriers. Ship displacement is totally useless as a metric of naval power and does not, in any way, reflect such power.

        The PLAN has way, way more vessels than the US, and every single one is better.

  • CrazyHungarian

    What tripe. China’s Navy is small, one A/C carrier Russian built, China’s Air Force is minimal, Russian built. They are yet to successfully build one jet engine. Their only chance would be to invade US with a billion soldiers…but without a significant Navy that’s impossible. Japan learned that attacking Hawaii just wakes up the giant. Besides why would China want to attack it’s best customer?

    • Mike

      Why did the Russians, with such brutality, put down your first attempts at democracy? The Chinese, much like the Russians, dream of a day when the world is under their domination, which, if I am guessing, is why you are here rather than in Hungary, aye?

      • Peter_T

        The Chinese, much like the Russians, dream of a day when the world is under their domination? Keeping hold on to the Cold War crap is detrimental to your mental health

        • Mike

          You’d have enjoyed spending sometime with Mr. Chamberlain, until it was shown, that in fact he was dreaming and it cost the rest of Europe and almost England while he dithered….. The cold war never ended, Star Wars just bankrupted the Soviet union. As long as we are on the top of the heap with this successful experiment at Democracy, there will be someone dreaming of taking it away…. Perhaps you also have not noticed that virtually no one is hammering on the doors of Red China to move there, aye?

          • Peter_T

            Ignoring obviously mental instability that “Cold War never ended”,
            Perhaps you should read some news on your last part on China again? Also you do realize China has 4x the people than USA on roughly the same area of land and that its immigration is one of the toughest because of its demography?

          • Mike

            Were did you serve in the U.S. Military Peter T?

          • Peter_T

            Personal info. Got nothing to with the subject.

          • useyourhead2

            Way out of line I’d say, aye? You sound like a Canadian with all the “ayes.”

          • Mike

            Actually, it has EVERYTHING to do with this DEFENSE sit… I did not ask you number, just where you are American or PLA, whether you served and have some idea of rather that you are an arm chair quarterback who has no idea?

          • Mike

            What, another PLA? Go away….

  • Mike

    Gentlemen,
    Could I suggest that these things happen in cycles…. We’ve just gone through a mini 1929 due to the same financial stupidity and political sell out that brought us to WW-ll….Once again, it has been the Conservative Ultra Wealthy (CUWs) believing that they could make a quick buck at great cost to the average citizen that has again opened this stage of danger. The ONLY hope we have of stopping WW-lll is by maintaining a huge and strong military, as that is the ONLY thing that keeps these very dangerous villains in their boxes… The alternative of a Chamberlain approach would, once again, leave us with our pants down when the bad guys come calling and we all know how badly that worked with the Nazis, Japanese and the Chinese… Thankfully our past and present governments and the majority of our voters want to keep a strong military.force in place….

    • allbuss84

      You mean the Liberal Ultra Wealthy. Clinton deregulated the banks in 1999 and forced Fannie Mae to expand subprime loans to boost minority home ownership. There are a slew of articles from the NYT’s in Sept-Nov 1999 talking about this.

      http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html

      • Mike

        You don’t really believe that do you? Ever hear of Gramm/Leach/Blyle? That was the legislation to remove Glass-Steagall. All powerful Republicans. The GOP had a majority and wanting to get a veto proof majority, they offered to pass Barney Franks’s bill to reduce lending standards in the inner cities.. It was a good idea to help people own their own homes and stop decay. Problem is that the GOP leadership removed the “inner city” restriction before passing it. That allowed the “reduced restrictions” loans to go nationwide at great profit to the banks that were bankrolling the GOP…. Then Treasury Sec. Ruben recommend that Clinton sign the legislation rather than veto (which he would have lost). Ruben then left government and took a job on the board of Citibank (which profited greatly by the removal of GS) for a million a year… The GOP gets the blame fair and square for both disasters, just like in 1929…. So don’t be so quick to listen to those GOP supported sites funded by the CUWs, aye? Oh, and you ought to know that today, most of the Media is also owned by the CUWs and their blind corporations, ever since Reagan relaxed the ownership laws on media in 1983….

    • Swiftright Right

      I got a good chuckle from this,
      You realize that your “CUWs” largely became cuws by profiteering off the backs of Americans and that one of their main tracks of profit was our grossly bloated defense budget?

      Oh and go educate yourself on Chamberlain. I’m sick of the recent fad of people bashing on Chamberlain when they have ZERO knowledge of what was going on in Europe beyond the standard one liner of Munich appeasement = bad.

      • Mike

        Boy,, you’ve got me there sir. I was born in England and if they’d had a draft I’d have served there also…. I’m VERY familiar with Chamberlain. Got no idea where you are coming from. Perhaps you could enlighten me….

        Also, you might want to study the Long Wave Cycle Theories of Kondrotiev for a better understanding of how these things happen in cycles… 1929 occurred again in October of 2007 under a Republican who followed a long stream of Republican administrations with the same practices and results…. 1932 occurred again in March 2009 when the stock market crash was stopped again under a Democratic Administration…

        I’m assuming that you are a Veteran (like me) as your name “Swiftright Right”.and the flag.. If you are, then Thank You for your service..If you are hard right wing and are not wealthy I would ask you why?

  • Matt

    “There’s no evidence the Chinese favor a “bolt out of the blue” without
    giving the adversary what they believe is a chance to back down,”

    So there is some kind of escalation over weeks, and the Chinese are just suppose to assume that the US won’t launch a preemptive strike on them? I would not rule out a “bolt out of the blue.”

    When might a nuclear war occur? When it is in the best interest of the leaders.

    Let’s take a look at why it might be in the best interest of leaders in both China and Russia to launch a nuclear war right now. Both countries are becoming more unstable and there is talk about the threat of revolution. The leaders must be worried about that possibility, for revolution will mean death to them. So if the leaders do nothing then it is not entirely clear if they will be around in 5 years. Maybe they will, or maybe they won’t.

    Right now there are concerns by a lot of people that China and Japan could get into a shooting match. That has the very real possibility of escalation to nuclear war with the US. So if the Chinese do nothing then they might end up at war with the US anyway.

    Russia has a major problem. Islamists from the Caucasus region (Chechnya) are going to Syria to fight. Russia is extremely worried that their return could spread instability into Russia and destabilize the country. Given that Russia is already at a tipping point, new spreading instability caused by Islamists could push the country into revolution.

    Russian leaders have already told us on multiple occasions that western interference in the Middle East could lead to a nuclear war and affect countries far away – that would be you, the US. Since 2008 Russia has threatened at least 15 times nuclear attack or nuclear targeting.

    The overall situation is that of an old forest that is ready for a major forest fire. Just because it is ready does not mean it will happen right away. There needs to be a catalyst. And after a catalyst don’t be surprised if it comes as a bolt out of the blue by both China and Russia many months later.

    When is the best time for a bolt out of the blue? The middle of spring for China and Russia. That’s the longest time to winter.

    • Mike

      “The Bear and The Dragon” was written a long time ago by Tom Clancy… It was written as fiction…. Or was it? Haven’t read it? You all might consider it… And if you do, try not to be to surprised at the “chills” you get relative to our current situation to which Matt refers….

      • GoNavy

        RIP TClancy, someone with more understanding of geopolitical strategy and tactics than many of our commanders and politicians.

        • Mike

          Sad day for our side…. We used to say that Tom’s books were a look into the future as so many things he wrote about eventually came to action, albeit, secretly of course…. RIP Tom, you were a shining light that, as Go Navy said, had so much foresight. Alas, many of us are alive today because of your writings and your incredible understanding of how things were going to work out such as current China and your “Bear and The Dragon” written so many years ago…. You sir got the “last laugh”…. :)

    • GoNavy

      One must consider that China is prepared for a nuclear war and most likely willing to take the consequences of a nuclear war.

      They have been preparing for such for over 60 years now. And they were willing to risk nuclear war in the Korean conflict when the Soviet backed off with that fear.

      I expect they have thousands of miles of tunnels to put the population into safety and keep their military assets safe from a nuclear attack.

      We Americans are not nearly so prepared.

  • Mriordon

    The bad news is that if they do this with a Dem president we’ll probably apologize for any damage we caused and then surrender with a bow.

    • Mike

      Apparently your knowledge and intelligence seems to have forgotten FDR. Or perhaps you would like the draft dodging Neocons of the Cheney/Bush (weapons of mass destruction)era back, aye? Geeezzz… :(

    • Swiftright Right

      Because we all know that Wilson, FDR and Kennedy were pushovers amirite?

      I mean Bush was such a hawk that he got grounded while he served in the Air National Guard for showing up to drill drunk

      • Mriordon

        You got me there. Of course it took you 19 days to come up with your clever reply, but I know you have to get things cleared with the party and all. FOM

  • whitylose g

    The big O hope for conflict

  • Rick J Black, Sr.

    It has always been the Communist doctrine to make the whole world heel to their ideology by any means possible. To that end, they will continue to develop and improve till they have parity or overwhelming force to effect that. It is an open question as to when that will occur. But it is just a matter of time before it does, not an if but a when. Of course, if our own country keeps progressing down the path of Statism all of this becomes moot as both ideologies become more similar and compatible with each others belief systems. Once we fall from national bankruptcy and can no longer field the forces we do now, they may be very well be tempted to make whatever incursions they desire. They will be the super power and us the third world nation at the mercy of those stronger than us. If we can not deter them from their Nationalistic goals or their plans for world domination, there will be no peace for anyone. I will not live to see how this all works out and maybe that is for the better as I could never survive under the iron fist of Statism.:(

    • schrodinger

      A retired grandfather should have the time to prepare and protect his children from real threats. Your local library will have plenty of reading on world history, including that of ‘communist’ efforts ( do differentiate from ‘socialist’ ).

      Do include researching some ‘experts’ whose conclusions don’t match yours.

      The relative size of the ‘State’ is an old question. This country was founded in great turmoil over many of these questions, fortunately our common enemy was our lack of representation with King George …

      Locke, Smith, etc … the Natural State logically leads to a limited ‘State’ before all sorts of disagreements begin. They way forward is to work from common ground and to be able to defend and protect at least this.

      Try reading Robert Nozick’s 1975 National Book Winner on the State.

      • Rick J Black, Sr.

        I read prodigiously everything I find of interest including other points of view so I am not limited in my assessment of my beliefs. It is a continuously evolving as I process new input. I am not static in my thinking and do not wish to be so. However, some basics of truth do not change over time. Socialism is just another form of Statism that more often than not leads to Communism. Since I’m not aware of the title of the book you recommend, I will endeavor to find out if my local library carries it and if so, give it a shot. I’ve seen the effects of Statism up close and personal and therefore am pretty solid in my opposition to it.

    • Peter_T

      When Mao is goine from China so did its ideological furor had gone. Such thing are in the past for 30+ years already so you should live in the present instead of the past

      • Rick J Black, Sr.

        The goals of Communism have not changed, just the way they go about thrusting it on the rest of the world. China presently, is not like the old USSR or even of Mao as you spoke of, that is true. But what they want has never changed. What has changed is their tactics and strategy, nothing more.

        • Mike

          Amen…..

        • Peter_T

          I’m sorry, I don’t see China thrusting Communism at anybody these days. It has stopped exporting ideology for a long time unlike the West. What info did you base on your opinion that “what they want has never changed”?

    • Mike

      Rick,
      Congratulations on surviving Vietnam and using your G.I. Bill to get a college education and a better life. I’d never have gotten through college if it was not for that benefit after giving so much of my time and efforts for this great country, especially when so many of the rich kids spent their college years partying and evading the draft!… That said, I’m hoping we stay militarily strong, as I believe that is the only way to give our kids a better life and keep those bad guys from coming our way

      • Rick J Black, Sr.

        Thank you for recognizing my sacrifice. It sure was not like that on returning to the world at the time of my discharge.:(

        • Mike

          Rick,
          Sorry, I missed your discharge date… I believe the draft was gone when you discharged… Mine was 10 years earlier… I walked on campus in 1966 and it was pretty tough (Drugs and demonstrations)… Luckily there were a few of us that were vets and we became something of a family… We all had a lot in common, G.I. Bill, poor and working jobs while in school, with little spare time… No body he-hawed or talked in our area of the library! Darn few thanked me for my service then, nor, I would imagine, did they yours. Now it is very different as these kids in uniform have a hard time paying for a cold beer or their meals!.. Didn’t say it before, but Thank You For Your Service!….. Incidentally, I had two kids and they both graduated from college also… :) No poverty in our family anymore…..

  • luiusdyding

    sydney and some are really idiot, thinking war is just like a video game. wake up , war is not a game or can be predict, it is a massive destruction.

    • Mike

      Consider volunteering so that you can get a better idea of the reality out there… The military will also teach you how to spell and construct sentences better….

    • corners

      they should watch that 80′s flick thats about a wargame that a kid thought was just a game.

  • Taishanese

    The reality is China and the US won’t be entering into a conflict with one another. If the US enters into a conflict with a major power, it will be Russia. China doesn’t have military parity with the US, but her economy is rapidly approaching parity (and will even surpass in a short time).

    Russia has neither and has a greater sense of insecurity when dealing with the US. However, in one area, i.e., the nuclear arena, she has parity with the US. And because of these two extremes (having nuclear parity but nowhere near the economic parity), it is the most likely major country to be confrontation with the US.

    China needs peace and stability to expand and realize her potential as a global economic power (which would be greater than the US). I would venture to say, there are more Americans who want war with China than the other way around. War would not adversely affect economic growth of the US as much as it would China.

    This Cold War mentality towards China is outdated. The US has won the Cold War and China has joined the global economy and working with the very global institutions that the US has created. China wants peace more than the US as her economy is still in transition from a poor developing country to a wealthy developed country.

    The reality is, some Americans wish Nixon never would have went to China. Despite that history will show it was good for the world and mankind, some Americans and Westerners don’t like the RELATIVE shift in the economic center towards the East. And wish someone would beat the war drums before it is too late.

    • ziggy1988

      There is no “Cold War mentality” towards China, there is genuine and well-founded concern over China’s increasing aggressiveness towards the US and its allies, its cyberattacks on the US and ASAT attacks on its satellites, its plans for war on the US and its allies, the aggressive warmongering statements from Chinese flag officers and senior colonels, and China’s huge military buildup which long ago exceeded any legitimate self-defense requirement China may have had.

      China is NOT “working with the very global institutions that the US has created” – China is working to UNDERMINE these institutions, the US-led global order, and US influence around the world. At intl institutions like the UN and the WTO, it OPPOSES the US at every turn.

      China is an enemy of the US, not a partner, and no amount of propaganda from a Chinaman will change that. Only a change in China’s behavior by China’s leaders can.

      • Taishanese

        “Chinaman”? …. that’s an old school trailer trash thing to say.

      • Argum

        After World War II, when Russia had been totally destroyed west of Moscow, the US began to market the, “Nuclear Arms race”, a shameless perversion of the truth that it was the US which had invented and actually deployed the weapon against human beings, and that by the time Russia had 50, the US had 1,000.

        Now we hear the same US smear against “belligerent” China, even as the US Navy is building the most advanced naval armada in history, replete with rail guns, linear induction catapults to service UAV stealth aircraft on one-way cyber-warfare missions, and free electron laser weapons. There is no legitimate threat that warrants the roll out of this force, since no other nation on earth is building one. So true to form, the US smear China for precisely the same cyber-warfare R&D that it is making. Indeed, the only actual cyber-warfare attack was Stuxnet, a joint US-Israeli attack against Iran. The Americans just love smearing folks as a prelude to manipulating domestic public opinion.

        Any rational human being, looking at the global deployment of the world’s forces, understands that America is in too many places it simply has no legitimate business in.

        Just look at a map of US military bases now surrounding Russia and China.

        • the great kazoo

          Better dead than red :)~

  • GoNavy

    We Americans and the Chinese are not so stupid to get in a war in China’s seas or land.

    Bottom line is America’s best chance for business success is in China. With China’s middle class growing by over 100 million people in the next decade. Ford and GM now sell more cars in China than any country including here at home. Cell phones and internet technologies make China the number one country for our communications technology and software and hardware. Geez, even Starbucks has more business in China than the USA. And we are now selling more and more agriculture products to China making it our number one export market for those goods and services.

    If we were able to think clearly we should be arming China with the military technology they want and get those parts of American business in play as well.

    Unfortunately we still have quite a few Americans with cold war anti-commies thinking getting in the way of our success. This is especially important when we cannot even keep our government running, sequestration and possible default on our national debt. Why not take a peace dividend instead of ramping up a stupid Air Sea battle plan…

    Time for the dinosaurs to retire or get in step with the modern world.

    China is not our enemy and we should integrate our militaries to focus on asymmetric wars like pirates, organized crime, and terrorists.

  • Bhess

    I’m sure there are some PLA generals who dream about this but Mexican generals still play wargames in their war college of how to fight an American invasion.
    The way I see it is the China is doing well doing what they are doing now. A war would garner them nothing. It comes down to that there is no money in starting a war with the U.S. or anyone else for that matter. Their government isn’t the best but they aren’t so insulated anymore as to think this would be a good idea.

  • mattmanhere

    Oh for goodness sakes, there is a better chance that I’ll be dating a supermodel tomorrow then that China will launch a massive attack against us.

    The overwhelming concern of the Chinese Communist Party is internal stability, which depends on economic growth. Absent a massive miscalculation by someone – like Taiwan declaring independence and us issuing our full throated support – this is a remarkably unlikely scenario.

    Yes, we should still be prepared, epecially in cyber warfare, but it his all seems like a justification for expensive new weapons systems. And while we’re at it, instead of a “pivot to Asia”, how about a pivot to home and getting our economic house in order. I think our defense establishment is in search of a new enemy…..

  • Hong Kong Guy

    Now that China may be, in some ways, even more capitalistic than some of America’s allies and definitely not communist any more, may be it’s time to reflect on some questions: 1. Why do the invader (Japan) and leader of the Allies against invasion “suddenly” become the latter’s closest ally to fight a former ally–China? 2. The US has been in war for 25 years…true, but why are there so many evils to fight? and how evil is a country which supplies Americans cheap goods for a good living, and lends it so much money, and never acquires an inch of territories it does not consider its “traditional” territories? 3. Why must a country as big and — though temporarily weakened — powerful must obey orders from another about whether it can reunite with a piece of its own land (meaning Taiwan) separated only by its own civil war? 4. Must any power, no matter how strong, risk all out war with another power for no real conflicts or insoluable rivalries between them, to the point that it rallies all neighbors around it to fight it, allegedly over some islets when nothing hampers free sailing along the beseiged country’s coasts? And, finally, why should the world or at least the neighbors be dragged into calamity with it?

  • TDog

    Selectively parsing our bits of The Art of War shows that while Americans may read, they often don’t comprehend. They choose instead to remember only those parts that suit their opinions or points of view. For example, this article. It ignores that Sun Tzu also said that when a weak nation confronts a strong one, they are likelier to engage in more aggressive rhetoric in an effort to scare the other side away and therefore win without fighting.

    China’s leaders tend to be very keen students of history. Just as they have taken lessons from America’s successful war in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, so have they taken lessons away from Japan’s defeat in World War II, namely that to attack the US unprovoked is to guarantee defeat.

    We like to think of ourselves as the “good guys”, but our recent and ongoing history of some very aggressive wars and our flagrant disregard for the rule of law both at home and abroad means that is more delusion than fact. We like to posit theories about a first strike Chinese attack on US forces, but let us examine a likelier scenario: what will China do when we launch an attack on them?

    • Colin Clark

      We read and we comprehended. One of the glories of Sun Tzu is that he’s a bit like the Bible. You can almost always find a relevant quote and this one certainly was relevant. Having read The Art of War several times (including the Gagliardi translation) I’m comfortable saying we did cherry pick and we did not misrepresent his thoughts.

  • nkawtg

    The troble here: ““The 2nd Artillery Force, which controls their ICBMs and their intermediate range missiles, has a very capable force,” he said, and the conventional-warhead weapons they control (but not their nuclear ones, one prays) would play a major role in any conflict.”
    Does the US have the capability to discriminate an ICBM launched with a conventional warhead vs. a nuclear one. I doubt it, so once China plays that hand all bets are off.
    I’ve never believed limited nuclear options would work when that concept was first introduced to US strategic forces back in the 70′s.

  • SF manluver

    We have no one to blame but ourselves. Every dollar spent at Walmart on cheap Chinese made goods, supports their military.

  • ziggy1988

    What utter nonsense! There’s so much wrong with this article that it’s hard to know what to start with.

    I guess I’ll start with the first sentence, and the fundamental presumption, of this article, namely, that “Because China believes it is much weaker than the United States, they are more likely to launch a massive preemptive strike in a crisis.”

    This is utter nonsense.

    Firstly, China is not “much weaker” than the US; in fact, today it is almost as strong as Meiguo, and its military and economic power is growing daily, while that of the US is shrinking by the day. Sequestration, if it persists, will only accelerate that trend. And the Chinese know it and – if you read their websites and blogs – are very happy about this. They can’t wait to avenge perceived wrongs supposedly committed by the West.

    Secondly, if China believed it were much weaker than the US, it would CERTAINLY not attack America or any of its treaty allies in the Pacific (if America’s commitment to them was viewed credible by China). That is because aggressors NEVER attack those who are stronger than them – unless they believe the victim is unwilling to defend itself. The Chinese are not idiots or suicidal fanatics like Muslim terrorists; they’re not going to start a war against someone stronger than them, a war they know they’d certainly lose. By now, everyone should know that it is WEAKNESS that is provocative and causes wars, while military strength PREVENTS wars.

    Thirdly, ASB is not provocative and will not lead to escalation. Because, if a war between the US and China erupts, it will NOT be a limited war fought with limited means over a bunch of islands. It will be a large-scale war, and Chinese military writings make it clear that neither the US homeland nor US space assets would be left untouched. In war, and especially in a future war with China, the only choice will be between victory by any means necessary or defeat. If US policymakers are not prepared to win by whatever means necessary, they should not involve the US in any Asian geopolitical games and should withdraw the US defense commitment from its Asian allies.

    Fourthly, the Chinese are far, far less dependent than this article and Mr Wortzel suggest. In fact, their A2/AD strategy is based on much more than missiles: they have already deployed, in large numbers, or are developing, naval mines, fast attack craft, Generation 4+ fighters, stealthy fighters and attack aircraft, a stealthy intercontinental bomber, submarines, lasers, and anti-satellite satellites (yes, such things do exist). So even if the US somehow defeated China’s missile challenge – which it will not, cos for every one interceptor China can produce several offensive missiles – it won’t matter, because China has many other A2/AD weapons at its disposal.

    Fifth, while the article says there has been “no large-scale use of anti-ship missiles since the Falklands in 1982″, that is a very important caveat. During the Falklands War, the Argies – despite being poorly led, poorly trained, poorly equipped, poorly funded, and in general much weaker than the British, STILL managed to nearly stop the British effort to retake the Falklands and sunk 6 British ships. This was done with weapons as primitive as dumb bombs delivered by A-4s and transonic Exocet ASCMs launched by Super Etendards operating from the Argie mainland.

    One can only imagine what China could do with its much larger arsenal of anti-ship missiles delivered by much more diverse and capable platforms operating on the land, in the air, and at sea – far out to the sea, in fact.

    Sixth, the article dismisses the PLAAF. What utter garbage! The PLAAF has hundreds of Flankers and almost 200 J-11s; these are superior to anything the US military flies except its F-22s and F-15s. On top of that, the PLA is developing the J-20, which, when it enters service 4-5 years from now, will render EVERY fighter on the planet, other than the F-22 and the PAKFA, useless, obsolete, impotent, and irrelevant.

    Training? Don’t make me laugh. Due to sequestration, 1/3 of the USAF’s combat squadrons had to STAND DOWN for several months, thus leading pilots to lose their skills. The same is happening AGAIN now, due to the shutdown. The notion that US pilots are better trained than their Chinese peers is a myth carefully propagated by the DOD for decades. But in fact, in Vietnam, US pilots got their asses thoroughly kicked by poorly-trained NV pilots.

    Mr Freedberg, you, of all people, should be able to write a much better article. I can’t give you anything better than an F for this.

  • bridgebuilder78

    LOL, I had to double check the URL to make sure I wasn’t reading the Onion.

    I doubt the Chinese are afraid of a country run by bunch of inept juveniles who hadn’t agreed on a basic budget since 2009 and who have just shut down the government and threatened to default.

    Well… on second thought, maybe the Chinese should be afraid: for inept juveniles with an army could get adventurous.

  • ziggy1988

    “WASHINGTON: Because China believes it is much weaker than the United States, they are more likely to launch a massive preemptive strike in a crisis. Here’s the other bad news: The current US concept for high-tech warfare, known as Air-Sea Battle, might escalate the conflict even further towards a “limited” nuclear war, says one of the top American experts on the Chinese military. (…)

    The Chinese are painfully aware that their planes can’t beat US or Japanese planes head-on, their ships can’t beat our ships, their submarines can’t beat our subs.”

    Oh yeah? Says who? In fact, China is hardly weaker than the United States, and their planes, ships, and subs are more than capable of beating American and Japanese aircraft, warships, and subs. Let’s look briefly at each of these types of weapon systems:

    AIRCRAFT: The PLAAF and the PLANAF have well over 300 Flankers (Su-27s, Su-30MKKs, J-11s) and 200 J-10 Sinocanards. Every single one of these aircraft is superior to every plane the US military flies except the F-22 (of which there are only 180) and F-15. In addition, the Chinese have 180 J-8 high-altitude interceptors, hundreds of JH-7 fighter-strikers, and 389 J-7s (MiG-21s) which can also defeat American aircraft other than the F-22. How? Simply by refusing to be straight, level-flying targets. They also have very well trained pilots who frequently practice aerial manoeuvering (spl?) and fighting dissimilar aircraft during their annual Red Sword/Blue Sword exercises.

    On top of this, the PLA has ordered 70 additional J-11s and is now developing and beginning to deploy the J-15 and the J-16, as well as the J-20 and the J-31. The J-15 and J-16 are significantly modernized Flanker variants rivalling the F-15 and far more capable than anything the US military flies, again excluding only the F-15 and the F-22. The J-16 is now beginning to enter active service. As for the J-20, suffice to say that when this excellent aircraft enters service 4-5 years from now, it will render every other fighter on the planet except the F-22 and the PAKFA irrelevant, impotent, obsolete, and useless, just like HMS Dreadnought rendered all previous battleships obsolete and irrelevant when she was commissioned.

    SHIPS: The PLA’s surface ships are, contrary to popular opinion, quite capable. The most important class of these is the Type 052 class of destroyers. The first variant includes, among its armament, C-803 ASCM launchers and HQ-7 SAMs for air defense. The next variant, the single-ship Type 051B, had similar armament. It, in turn, was followed by the Type 051C, which boasted much better and larger armament: 48 long-range S-300F (SA-N-20) SAM tubes in revolver-style VLSes, 8 C-803 ASCM launchers, 2 30mm Gatling gun CIWS, one 100m general purpose gun, and lesser armament. It was then followed by the Type 052B, which has very similar armament but SA-N-12 Grizzly, instead of SA-N-20, SAMs, and also has anti-submarine mortars, making it a potent ASW platform.

    It was then followed by the even better Type 052C, of which 5 vessels have been completed and a sixth is under construction. A Type 052C DDG’s armament consists of, among other things, 48 HHQ-9 long-range SAMs, 8 C-805 ASCM launchers, 2 30mm CIWSs, a 100mm gun, and 4×18-tube rocket decoy launchers.

    But the PLAN is already building a new class of even more capable DDGs – the Type 052D, or Chinese Aegis, although it is far more capable than any Aegis CG or DDG operated or planned by the USN. The Type 052D’s armament includes 64 VLS cells, several CIWS, and other lesser armament found on previous Chinese DDGs. China plans to build eight of these warships. 4 are already under construction.

    Each of these, except the Type 051B, can carry at least one, and older generations even two, Kamov or Harbin Z-9, helicopters.

    In addition, China has several Russian-built Sovremenny (Modern) class DDGs armed to the teeth with ship-killing missiles.

    SUBMARINES: The PLAN’s subs are more than capable of beating the USN’s subs, and the PLAN will soon have more of these than the USN – many more, in fact, cos under current budgetary plans, even if sequestration is repealed and entitlement programs reformed, the USN will have only 48 attack subs and 12 ballistic missile subs, while China already has at least 63-64 subs of all types. These include 12 Kilo, 13 Song, 7 Yuan, and 1 Qing class diesel-electric subs (with more under construction), and 3 Han, 5 Shang, and at least 1 Type 095 (Qin?) class SSN, with more under construction. Each of these subs is more than capable of defeating the USN’s noisy LA class submarines; only the (much quieter) Seawolf and Virginia classes could defeat them.

    Chinese subs pose an even greater danger to USN ships. How effective would they be? Well, in 2006, a Chinese Song class sub sneaked below a USN carrier battle group so quietly and so successfully that it was within torpedo range of the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63). Had that been real combat, the Kitty Hawk would’ve been at the bottom of the ocean.

    Diesel-electric subs are so quiet, and the USN’s anti-submarine warfare skills and equipment so degraded after 12 years of fighting in useless jihadist viper pits, that in exercises held in recent years with friendly navies, with their subs as the hunters and USN carriers as the prey, the “friendly” subs managed to “kill” the carriers everytime and were never detected.

    Which means that, if those exercises had been real combat, EVERY carrier of the US Navy, including the now-retired Enterprise, would’ve been at the bottom of the ocean.

    Canadian Professor Roger Thompson has detailed the weaknesses of the USN quite nicely in a 2007 book.

    As for the claim that, until recently, the PLAN and the PLAAF were commanded by soldiers, that is a blatant lie. Both services have been commanded by sailors and airmen for many decades, if not from the beginning of their existence. Adm. Wu Shengli and General Ma Xiaotian are hardly the first sailor and airman, respectively, to command these services, nor was Ma’s predecessor, Gen. Xu Qiliang, the first airman to do so.

    But Gen. Xu is, AFAIK, the first airman to become a Vice Chairman of the CMC (and thus also a member of the Politburo), thus reflecting the growing clout of the PLAAF within the PLA and the CPC.

    The idea that China is unable to conduct serious joint operations is also totally false. China’s Military Regions combine ground, naval, and air forces under one roof, and they are quite capable of conducting joint operations; and no one has practiced this better than Gen. Fan Changlong during his tenure as commander of the Jinan MR. For this successful tenure, he has been promoted to Vice Chairman of the CMC and member of the Politburo.

    China has never tested more than half a dozen ballistic missiles at once. Maybe? But has the US, Russia, India, Pakistan, France, or Britain ever done so? If so, when was the last time that happened? Yet, no one questions these countries’ ability to launch large-scale missile barrages.

    Nor is it true, as has been alleged in this article, that China’s military relies solely on

    Mr Freedberg, you and the much-vaunted “experts” on China’s military that you quote clearly know very little, if anything, on the subject. You and they would be well advised not to pontificate on a subject you, and they, are clearly utterly ignorant about. By pontificating, you, and they, are only misleading others and doing great damage to America.

  • Sejarah Melayu

    The US shutdown is good news to all the people of the world, except for the
    Americans & its Zionism allies. The plan to make war in Syria had to be
    abandoned, as now the US doesn’t have the money to even pay for its jet fuel
    for its fighter planes. Almost all airborne training except for mission in Afghanistan had to be shelved and more than 2/3 of its fighter planes had to be grounded. Even some of the airplane technicians had to be furloughed. No more war is good for the peaceful co-existance for the people of the world, but bad for the American & its Zionism allies. Now they don’t even have the money to fly the jets, bomb & kill other people anymore…. ;-) :-)

  • Sejarah Melayu

    The China threat is a hoax!!! By promoting the China threat of military expansion towards South East Asia, the US has managed to convince some stupid ASEAN countries to let the US to base its fighter planes & military inside their own countries. The US plans is actually to scare the shit out of the ASEANs. And when the ASEANs are scare shit of the Chinese, they unconsciously let the Americans occupy their countries with its military.

    The same thing happen to the Arab Gulf countries. The US managed a propaganda
    war against the Iraqis for decades, saying the Iraqis have chemical weapons,
    developing the nuclear weapons & etc. If you let the Iraqis developed the
    nuclear weapons, sooner or later the Iraqis will be a threat to whole the Arab Gulf States. Sooner or later the Iraqis might start a war & occupy the smaller & defendless Arab Gulf states.

    Thus, to prevent the future Iraqi aggression against them, these stupid Arab
    countries with their corrupted leaders agree to let the Americans to base its
    military personnals and fighter planes inside their countries, in the pretext to protect them from the Iraqis. But the Arab Gulf states are fool Arabs. It’s all a hoax. In the end, the Americans managed to occupied all of the Arab Gulf states without even firing a single bullet!!!

    Now, once the US already have a foothold in these stupid Arab states, you think that it will be easy to kick the Americans out? U think those stupid Arab sheikhs, willing to go to war against the Americans? No way. Let me become a billionaire, buy some English football clubs while the majority of my fellow citizens suffers.

    In Sun Tzu’s Art of War, Chapter 3: Attack by Stratagem, he said “In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy’s country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.”

    Another of his words, ” Therefore the skillful leader subdues the enemy’s troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field.”

    In addition, he says, “With his forces intact he will dispute the mastery of the Empire, and thus, without losing a man, his triumph will be complete. This is the method of attacking by stratagem.”

    Thus, it looks like the greatest triumph of the US military is not the occupation of Iraq, but the occupation of the stupid Arab Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait & Oman, without even firing a single bullet & without even losing a single American soldier. The Arabs leaders have been deceived and they are such morons!

    By the way, I’m a Malaysian & a Muslims, and I detest the wasteful & corrupted habits of the Arab leaders. These are the Wahabbis, spreading their extreme
    “Islamic” ideology to the rest of the Muslim world. The Libyas, Iraqis, Afghanistans & Syrias have all been living peacefully together for generations. Until these stupid Arab morons coming to these peaceful Islamic countries & spreading their extreme brand of Wahabbi ideology, which is not Islamic at all.

    Islam, or “Salam” means peace. But the Wahhabi ideology only existed during the 1st World War, by Muhammad Abdul Wahab in Saudi Arabia. The Wahhabi
    ideology spread terror & sectarian wars between the Sunnis & the Syiahs. Whereas, before this, the Sunnis & Syiahs have been living peacefully in Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan for generations.

    - DON’T BE DECEIVED BY THE STUPID WAHHABI IDEOLOGY.
    - DON’T BE DECEIVED BY THE MORONS ARAB LEADERS OF THE GULF STATES.
    - & DON’T BE DECEIVED BY THE CUNNING PROPAGANDA WAR BY THE U.S. AGAINST THE CHINESE.
    - CHINA IS NOT A THREAT TO ASEAN. BUT IT IS THE US THAT ARE A THREAT TO THE ASEANS & ALL THE PEACEFUL NATIONS OF THE WORLD.

  • THIS IS XERXIS!

    Foolish people will always have so much loves for war, war that guaranteed them victories, foolish people such as of the Breaking Defense…… It’s amazing how many BS they can came up with. Playing too much video games and win too much on Easy Mode.

    @Mike SHUT UP!

    • SolidBro

      You Engrish not being so goodly, Chinaman.

      • THIS IS XERXIS!

        Same goes to you, my dear Americana :)

  • SolidBro

    What it all boils down to is this: (1) China has numerous land forces
    and cannot be invaded in a land war on the Asian mainland, and (2) China
    is extremely weak in force projection beyond its shores, with a navy
    that is vastly inferior to the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (and a
    total joke compared to the US Pacific Fleet alone) and an air force that
    would not last very long against Japan’s vastly superior BVR (beyond
    visual range) air-to-air missiles and radar systems with AWACS
    integration and also the Aegis shipboard AD system – plus China has no
    meaningful amphibious force projection capability. China rules the Asian
    mainland but it toothless beyond its own shores.

  • SolidBro

    BTW, the most likely area for actual large-scale combat is between China and Russia over the vast resources of Siberia. China is already moving people and factories into
    Siberia with Russia’s assent. Now China is stirring the pot in Siberia and trying to get the Siberians to push for autonomy from Moscow as a wedge. Putin and the Russian military will not simply allow their pot of gold/oil/diamonds/industrial metals be taken by China, and China will not stop trying to steal it. So at some point in the next 20-40 years, China and Russia will tangle in Siberia – they already have a long-standing border dispute and have fought battles at the Amur river (which the Russians won)
    in the past. Both countries are very – ah, shall we say pigheaded or stubborn about not losing face – and I expect it will degenerate into a nuclear exchange.

    America’s most pressing concern really is that we are downwind from the fallout pattern!

  • corners

    ” a “limited” nuclear war,”

    All it will take is one officer to take it personal his home town or loved one was just turned to dust for it to became a world wide nuclear war where the public are targets again for mass killings.

  • will jagdon

    Defeating a Paper Tiger: Stopping China’s Military Rise.
    By
    Will Jagdon Jr.

    Merriam-Webster Dictionary describes a paper tiger as one that is outwardly powerful or dangerous but inwardly weak or ineffective. China’s behavior in the South
    China Sea (SCS) towards its neighbors is an ominous sign of a rising
    power. In due course, China will stumble upon a sleeping giant in the Pacific, the U.S. But China’s strength of top-down, centralized operations can also be its greatest weakness. U.S. Global Integrated Operations (GIO), positioned throughout the Pacific Rim, are decentralized and exercise independent mission command with the freedom to employ any means necessary to defeat the enemy. According to Ori Brafman and Rod Beckstrom’s book, The Starfish and the Spider, centralized operations are like a spider, with the CEO at the top making all decisions. Decentralized operations resemble a starfish, with power distributed to its legs, flexible, ambiguous, and fluid. If history repeats itself in the SCS, and given China’s great technological advancement, initial salvos could have catastrophic effects similar to the surprise attacks on Pearl Harbor and the World Trade Center. Eventually, GIO will choke the Chinese military into submission.

    Background for a Showdown: U.S. Forward Deployment in Asia

    The U.S. change of strategy, the “Pivot,” towards a more assertive economic, military, and diplomatic push in Southeast Asia resulted after America realized[1]
    that the global economy had shifted toward the Pacific Rim, away from North
    America and the European Union. In 2010 the U.S. exported 51% of its goods and
    72% of its agricultural products to the Asian Pacific. American economists expect that by 2015, East Asian countries will surpass NAFTA and the Euro zones as the world’s largest trading bloc.[2] Failure to execute the Pivot results in greater strategic risk, to include loss of American strategic edge in political, economic, geographic, space, and cyberspace domains

    Another example of the need of U.S. involvement in Asia involves the “ring of fire,” an area referred to by PACOM as the most turbulent in the Pacific Region, where constant loss of lives and properties occur due to natural disasters, pandemics, war, and conflict.[3] Without U.S. presence and engagement, China fills the void, quickly excluding the U.S. military from any regional Asian Involvement.[4] Furthermore, China confirms its own assumptions of the U.S. as a declining world power similar to Rome, too exhausted to recover from its financial meltdown.[5] The U.S. Forward Deployment in Asia supported by GIO must dominate the region.

    The Dance of the Paper Tiger: China’s Rising Military

    Uncertainties posed by China’s growing presence and influence in Asia raise increasing concerns for the U.S. Improvements in China’s military
    posture and anti-access / area denial (A2 / AD) capabilities,[6] Chinese
    distrust of U.S. regional intentions, and aggressive territorial claims stir
    the evolving security dynamics in Asia, challenging U.S. national interests in
    cyberspace, space, and maritime security.

    China’s “fleet-in-being” strategy uses tactics that enable a weaker navy to deter or cripple an enemy’s attack capabilities.[7] Generating a misperception of strength, the overall Chinese strategy plans to inflict massive losses on U.S. forces within a short time span, raising doubts among the American public and allies about U.S. defensive capabilities. High casualties from an extended operation would create a condition averse to the American public similar to the Vietnam experience.

    Chinese A2 / AD tactics involve preemptive attacks designed to inflict severe damage on U.S. forces in the Western Pacific Theater of Operations (WPTO), keeping them out of range, disrupting command and control (C2), and limiting freedom of movement in the region.

    The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force and Navy play a crucial role, and their nuclear forces make an aggressor hesitate. If a Chinese aircraft carrier battle group counters the U.S. naval presence in the SCS, it focuses on anti-air and anti-surface warfare capabilities. The primary tools involve a large submarine fleet, anti-ship ballistic missiles, and fast attack craft armed with anti-ship missiles.[8] It targets U.S. carrier strike groups (CSGs) with the sole purpose of destroying an aircraft carrier.

    The PLA Air Force integrates air-space early warning and provides ballistic missile defenses. More importantly, it introduces new medium-range surface-to-air missiles (SAM), long range H-6 bombers, anti-ship ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles which can attack with a conventional or nuclear payload.[9] Its anti-satellite system (ASAT) proves capable of hitting targets in space, a ground breaking achievement for future killer satellites, space-based anti-ballistic missiles, and space landmines.[10] At the same time, Chinese stealth-type fighter aircraft J-20[11]
    and China’s Dong Feng-21D “carrier killer” anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM)
    system can reach Mach 10-12, annihilating naval defenses.[12]

    GIO’s response to China’s rise involves a new operational design concept based on a fleet dispersal model, leveraged basing arrangements with allies and partners, organized low signature cyber operations against a more tailored threat, and cross-domain operations involving surface, air, maritime, cyber, and space resources. The fleet dispersal model complicates the Chinese’s intelligence gathering operations and ability to react to movement of forces from multiple locations. The Defense Strategic Guidance (DSG) directs the U.S. military to rebalance with emphasis on operating in A2 / AD regions in order for the U.S. to maintain its ability to project power and influence.[13] The Chairman Strategic Direction to the Joint Force (CSDJF) guides the Army, Navy, and the Marines to hold service-unique strengths and build capabilities that do not exist until combined as a joint task force.[14]

    A parallel model, the Air Sea Battle Concept (ASBC), counters China’s A2 / AD strategy, which challenge U.S. freedom of action in the SCS.[15] The ASBC requires joint integration of air and naval forces to network integrated attacks in depth to destroy the A2 / AD capabilities.[16] With bases and prepositioned assets geographically dispersed throughout the Pacific Rim, a strategic space exists where initial salvoes of Chinese anti-warship ballistic or cruise missiles may or may not deliver decisive blows. In addition, the time span for missiles to cross the space creates a window of opportunity for the Chinese to hesitate, allowing the allies to conduct cross domain operations with anti-satellite (ANSAT) missiles targeting Chinese GPS satellites.
    The Joint Force must use ASBC to help set the conditions at the operational level to sustain a stable, favorable conventional military balance in the Pacific Region.[17] ASBC supports U.S. treaties and arrangements to defend allies and partners in the region.[18] Allies such as Japan and Australia play important enabling and supporting roles in SCS.[18] he Joint Force coordinates with Allies in Asia in response to China’s ASAT system. Working with the U.S., Japan provides counter ASAT capabilities.[20]

    Basing arrangements with allies and partners provides flexibility and leverages multiple capabilities to overwhelm the Chinese.[21] PACOM’s permanent based forces operate from South Korea and Japan. The fast U.S. littoral ships in Singapore
    provide around the clock coverage along the shallow shores of the SCS. Once reinforced by a carrier strike group (CSG), the combined force could choke the Malacca Strait, Chinese’s strategic weakness.[22] Strategic locations in Hawaii, Japan, and Australia provide adequate forces in the event of a land war. Dispersed units in the Pacific include the Eighth Army in South Korea; one Stryker Army Brigade in the Big Island of Hawaii; the U.S. Seventh Fleet in Yokosuka;[23]
    20,000 U.S. Marines in Okinawa; 5,000 Marines in Guam; 2,500 in Australia; and
    1,500 in Hawaii. In addition, increasing numbers of U.S. ships operating from
    Australian bases and the Army’s I Corps at Joint Base Lewis-McChord provide
    regionally aligned forces to the Pacific with varied missions to include conventional operations, special operations, humanitarian operations, Theater Security Cooperation (TSC), piracy and pandemic response.[24]

    The Joint Force organizes to the Chinese threat by integrating Japan and Korea into its aggression-projection means (integrated war-fighting), which include missile advanced warning systems to detect incoming missiles.[25] Japan provides robust Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations directed against Chinese activities, combat formations, and cyber threats.

    Joint Force Air Force and Navy provide multiple attack options to include the Air Force long-range penetrating strike operations with stealth bombers to destroy PLA ground-based long-range maritime surveillance systems. The Navy’s submarine-based and carrier-based ISR strike the PLA Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) to make them ineffective. Navy Aegis ships supplement anti missile-defense assets in support of allies.[26]

    Low signature capabilities such as cyberspace counter China’s cyber war specialists. Joint Force cyber response includes surgical and mass-based attacks to carry out its intended effect of mass disruption and full systems breakdowns.[27] In combination with lethal and kinetic combat operations, the overall net negative effects overwhelm the Chinese military.[28]

    Since the PLA relies on its anti-ship missiles arsenal and ASAT operations against U.S. CSG and satellites, the Joint Force space cross-domain operations allow its ground-launched ASAT missiles to destroy GPS and ASAT space systems, making their anti-ship missiles vulnerable and less accurate.[29]

    In sum, even if the Chinese successfully initiate a battle in the Pacific, its greatest strength is also its greatest weakness: centralized operations. GIO synergy, with cross domain operations including surface, air, maritime, cyber, and space resemble a starfish’s legs, each with its own decentralized and mission command
    operations, choking China’s PLA into submission.

    —————
    References.

    [1] Edwin Rueda, “Engagement in Southeast Asia,” Marine Corp Gazette, 96, no. 8 (August 2012): 1.

    [2] David Barno, Nora Bensahel, and Travis Sharp, “Pivot but Hedge: A Strategy for Pivoting to Asia While Hedging in the Middle East,” Orbis, 56, no. 2 (January 2012):
    159.

    [3] Paul McLeary, “Westward Expansion,” Army Times, October 25, 2012, 13.

    [4] Rueda, “Engagement in Southeast Asia,” 1.

    [5] Kevin Rudd, “Beyond the Pivot,” Foreign
    Affairs, (March / April 2013): 9.

    [6] Jan van Tol, Mark Gunzinger, Andrew Krepinevich, and Jim Thomas, “Air-Sea Battle: A Point of Departure Operational Concept,” Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, (May 18, 2010): xii.

    [7] Robert Rubel, “Command of the Sea, an Old Concept Resurfaces in a New Form,” Naval War College Review, 65, no. 4 (1986): 27.

    [8] Office of the Secretary of Defense, Annual Report to Congress. Military and Security Development Involving People’s Republic of China 2012, (Washington, D.C: Office of Secretary of Defense, May 2012), iv.

    [9] Tol and Krepenevich, “Air-Sea Battle,” xii.

    [10] Paul Oh, “Assessing Chinese Intentions for the Military Use of the Space
    Domain,” Joint Force Quarterly, no. 64 (1 QTR, 2012): 94.

    [11] Kyle Mizokami, The National Interest, Five Chinese Weapons of War America Should Fear (2014) http://nationalinterest.org/feature/five-chinese-weapons-war-america-should-fear-10388; 7May14.

    [12] Dean Cheng, “Chinese Military Modernization: The Future is Arriving Much Sooner Than Expected,” December 30, 2010 Web Memo, (Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation, no 3090 (2010): 1.

    [13] Barack Obama, National Security Strategy, (Washington, D.C.: The White House, May 2010), 8.

    [14] Martin Dempsey, Chairman Strategic Direction to the Joint Force, (Washington, DC.: U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, February 2012) 7.

    [15] Lowell Ditmer, “Asia in 2011: Transition?” Asian Survey 52, no. 1 (January/February 2012): 1.

    [16] Philip Dupree and Jordan Thomas, “Air-Sea Battle: Clearing the Fog,” Armed Forces Journal, (May 2012): 2.

    [17] Tol and Krepenevich, “Air-Sea Battle,” xiii.

    [18] Ditmer, “Asia in Transition,” 2.

    [19] Robert Willard, “Statement of Admiral Robert F. Willard, U.S. Navy Commander,
    U.S. Pacific Command,” before the Senate Armed Services Committee, U.S. Pacific
    Command Posture, 28 February 2012): 6.

    [20] Ditmer, “Asia in Transition,” 2.

    [21] Free Pacific, U.S. Forward-Deployed Diplomacy Coming to a Pacific Location Near You (October 20, 2011) [internet]; available from http://freepacific.org/2011/10/20/unashamed-military-aim-in-the pacific.

    [22] Willard, “Statement of Admiral Robert F. Willard.” 4.

    [23] U.S. Forward-Deployed Diplomacy. 1

    [24] McCleary, “Westward expansion,” 12.

    [25] U.S. Forward-Deployed Diplomacy. 1

    [26] Tol and Krepenevich, “Air-Sea Battle,” xv.

    [27] Benjamin S. Lambeth, “Airpower, Spacepower, and Cyberpower,” Joint Force Quarterly, 60 (1st Quarter, 2011).

    [28] Ibid, 48.

    [29] Tol and Krepenevich, “Air-Sea Battle,” xv.

  • e fung

    The Motive? Its all about the money and the debts!

    Japan was not required to pay any war reparation to the Allied but had to take up 30% of all US Treasury bonds being issued! Now after 60 years, Japan is the biggest US creditor and (33 years) maturity due! Only way to get out of it would be by default/bankruptcy or destruction of the instruments with a well aimed nuke at the Japanese Reserve! Oop a misguided cruise missile in a shooting war!

    The way out seems to be to cause instability in the region and gloat China into a war with Japan which seems to be easy enough as the Japanese killed over 20 millions Chinese in WW2 and never acknowledge or apologies’ for that!

    Same medicine for the Japanese as the wiping out a big chunk of the US-Chinese debts in WW2 aka Nanking Massacre! Up to about 330,000 Chinese were slaughtered until a part of the large Chinese owned US Liberty Bonds (authorized by the League of Nations for the US Govt in the 1930s and with today value of
    over USD 2+?? Trillions) were handed over to the Japanese by General Chiang K
    S! This Japanese war booty pressed from the Chinese at a cost of 330,000 lives was lost in the Philippines when the OSS raided the Japanese GHQ transfer. It finally ended up in Mindanao and with the 20 boxes of bearer bonds under the safe keeping of a local headman! Now and then after 60+ years US Liberty Bearer Bonds with face value of up to $500 millions apiece would surface and would naturally declared as counterfeit by the Feds! Which counterfeiter would be so stupid as to counterfeit bearer bond of such a high denomination! Lol

  • wtowensjr@

    China is encouraging population growth (Currently they our self sustaining in food overwhelming in manpower) and right up there in weaponry.

    The can walk or motor to Russia !

    I am sure this fact does not go unknown In Russia.

    The perfect arrangement to me would be military treaties with Russia with China as an outside balance to both to restrain them selves and not provoke a possible end of mankind war.

    The force of law laid down by these three possessing the ability to abruptly end the existence of those not adhering such would be conclusive IMO. India might be considered as an addition.

    Nation’s, states etc unable to support themselves must reconfigure their borders
    to comply or be put in a pool as we do people and as unprofitable companies might combine to stay in the game.

    We must find a way to control the creeping number of “ass holes” we now seem to attract to govern ourselves.

    Its a start !

  • wtowensjr@

    Neither Russia or China are our (USA) enemies and we need (we three) to concentrate on developing a suitable arrangement between us for world order. Including control of the bankers who now dictate many of our actions (that include continuous WAR.)

    IF YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF THIS SOURCE YOU ARE REMISS!