US panic at China's new ship killer

G

Geriatrix

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
6,554
Reaction score
3
Location
Right here
The father of China's modernisation, Deng Xiaoping, gave his colleagues a famous piece of advice: "Hide your strength, bide your time, and do what you can." China's leaders have kept to Deng's advice, modernising at breakneck speed without calling too much attention to the Middle Kingdom's gathering power.

In a momentary slip, the leadership declared a new slogan in 2003, announcing China's "peaceful rise". But the word "rise" was considered too provocative to American ears, perhaps even threatening. In 2004 it was revised to "peaceful development".

In the meantime, China has been doing what it can. The world has watched, mesmerised, as China overtook Germany this year to become the world's third-biggest economy with an annual output of $US3.4 trillion ($3.9 trillion).

It is still behind Japan's $US4.3 trillion economy and is far smaller than America's $US14 trillion economic behemoth, yet it is commonly projected to vault over Japan within a few years and the US by 2030 or 2040.

Last year China's military decided it had been demure and self-effacing for long enough. The Military Digest, published by China's armed forces, carried a commentary in April 2008 titled "Phase of Exercising Restraint in National Defence is Over."

Under Deng, China in 1978 had launched its famous "four modernisations" to build China into a modern state by the early part of the 21st century. The last of the four was the modernisation of the military.

But the Military Digest set out that, under the current President, Hu Jintao, the modernisation of the armed forces would be given equal emphasis to the country's economic renovation.

The US Defence Department had long been troubled by the pace of Beijing's military build-up, but China was considered to be some 30 years behind the American forces and not any real competitor for the US as the hegemon of the Pacific Ocean.

The unchallengeable dominance of the US Seventh Fleet was starkly demonstrated in the crisis of 1996 when China seemed to be preparing to attack Taiwan, the country Beijing deems a "renegade province".

The US sent two aircraft carrier battle groups to stand off the Taiwan Straits. Each is a high-tech armada of ships and planes and missiles, with the aircraft carrier as a big waterborne base for the fleet. The deployment was an unmistakeable warning that the US would defend Taiwan. Beijing backed down. So surely Chinese braggadocio about a new military era was rhetoric, not real.

But Washington had been using the wrong yardstick, according to a former senior official in the US State Department who made a close study of China's military. "There's been a tendency to compare China's military to our own," says the analyst Randy Schriver, "but it's the wrong metric."

Washington had been reassured by the fact the Chinese had not reached parity with the US. "But we shouldn't be lulled into that thinking; we need to think about what cost China can inflict on us, and this goes for all our allies too," Schriver told me recently.

And when looked at this way, China suddenly becomes a much more potent military force. Indeed, China is in advanced state of developing a new weapon which Schriver describes as "a huge game-changer".

In March, an analyst with the US Navy Institute, Raymond Pritchett, wrote that the news of this new weapon had "created a panic" in the US Navy.

The weapon? It is a ballistic missile designed to strike ships at sea. The US Navy Institute's headline on the report was more dramatic: "Chinese Develop Special 'Kill Weapon' to Destroy US Aircraft Carriers."

The institute's report said the Dong Feng missile was thought to have a range of about 2000 kilometres and a speed of Mach 10: "The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a US supercarrier in one strike."

Schriver, a former navy intelligence officer who went on to become deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific in the second Bush administration, says the implications are profound: "After the Taiwan crisis in 1996, the Chinese looked at it and said, 'what do we need to do to prevent the US intervening like this again?'"

The result, 13 years later, is the Dong Feng 21. "It's a technological leap that's never [before] been made," says Schriver, now the head of a non-partisan research body, Project 2049 Institute, and a founding partner of the consulting firm Armitage International.

"The Russians couldn't do it. If it works, it will have the range of a ballistic missile and the accuracy of a cruise missile.

"The Chinese would have the ability to hold our carriers at a great distance - it almost makes the aircraft carriers obsolete.

"What did we do in 1996? We sent carriers. What are the Chinese doing? Taking the carriers out of the equation." He thinks it prudent to expect such missiles to be operating within a couple of years.

No wonder the US Navy is in a panic. If this weapon takes the field, and unless the US can quickly develop a countermeasure, it is a deeply troubling development.

The US Navy, the peacekeeper and guarantor of strategic stability in the Pacific since World War II, will lose its ability to operate anywhere near the Chinese mainland. It is a development of historic significance with which China can celebrate its 60 years under communist rule.

The US kept the Pacific peaceful and its sea lanes open. What will China do?
Click to expand...
Progress?
 
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ship-killer-20090928-g95b.html?skin=text-only

Date: September 29 2009

Peter Hartcher
--

The Russians wouldn't tell you if they could do this or not. A lot of Chinese technology is derived from their anyway. The Russian already have submarines that are designated "fleet killer". Kursk was one.

Schriver, a former navy intelligence officer who went on to become deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific in the second Bush administration, says the implications are profound: "After the Taiwan crisis in 1996, the Chinese looked at it and said, 'what do we need to do to prevent the US intervening like this again?'"
Click to expand...
So thanks to that posturing, we now have more destructive weapons in the world.
 
Sackboy said:
The Russians wouldn't tell you if they could do this or not. A lot of Chinese technology is derived from their anyway. The Russian already have submarines that are designated "fleet killer". Kursk was one.
Click to expand...

When they're not self destructing :o

So thanks to that posturing, we now have more destructive weapons in the world.
Click to expand...

Yeah rather snuff out Taiwan's democratic independence :rolleyes:
 
"Hide your strength, bide your time, and do what you can."

China is not the only one to have taken his advice, and they would be cautious to keep that in mind. In war time, the truth must be protected by a bodyguard of lies. It would be foolish of any country to simply make presumptions on what another country's capability is or is not, and even more foolish to make decisions on what another country says their capability is or is not.

I wouldn't be so hasty in drawing conclusions about what could very well be leaked misinformation on the both sides, especially the US ;)
 
Are people under the impression that there will be war between China and the US?
 
Geriatrix said:
Progress?
Click to expand...

You do know that that's all BS released by the DOD and other pundits in an effort to increase the defence budget.

The Russians have had the 2.5 Mach anti-ship missile for ages, the SS-N-22 'Sunburn', http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/moskit.htm

If one Chinese missile hits a US ship, it will mean war a war China will lose. China has no intention to start a war. China has also no blue water navy - heck even the Japanese SDF Navy could take out the whole of the Chinese navy in one go but people write these sensationalist articles in the hope that DOD budgets will be increased.
 
JHatman said:
"Hide your strength, bide your time, and do what you can."

China is not the only one to have taken his advice, and they would be cautious to keep that in mind. In war time, the truth must be protected by a bodyguard of lies. It would be foolish of any country to simply make presumptions on what another country's capability is or is not, and even more foolish to make decisions on what another country says their capability is or is not.

I wouldn't be so hasty in drawing conclusions about what could very well be leaked misinformation on the both sides, especially the US ;)
Click to expand...

I agree with you that this is just talk to get more $$$ for better defense systems. However, China has no intention of fighting the US, certainly the US is China's single biggest market - it would be suicidal to start a war with the US, not only because of a military defeat China would face but also because their economy would go to the dogs and the Communist Party would be overthrown from within, Chinese leaders would never do that.

China's real enemy and a source of land and minerals is Russia. A war between Russia and China is likely because Russia has the land and few people while China requires that land and has a huge population. Areas of east Russia also used to be Chinese until the Tsars simply annexed them - you know everyone took a chunk of China in the 18th and 19th centuries -
the British, the Russians, the Japanese.

If you read between the lines or speak to people on the ground you'll see that the Chinese eye that territory with envy and rightfully - it is after all underutilised and it was stolen by the Tsars. The Soviet Union and China have fought wars before - there were direct skirmishes and there was the major proxy war with Russian backed Vietnam being attacked by Chinese backed Khmer Rouge (Kampuchea aka Cambodia).
 
Last edited:
Peter you talk of the chinese navy but fail to mention the chinese army.

You think the US would walk all over china in a war? What makes you think the US will walk all over the biggest army on the planet? Now add in Russia's army who would without a doubt side with china and you think the US will win the war? Let me tell you the US cannot and will not ever dream of attacking china.

The US cannot even win the war in Iraq and afghanistan now you think they can suddenly smash the chinese army, with what resources exactly?

Why would china and Russia have a war? If anything they will join forces against the US.
 
Last edited:
So, the USA using 5%-10% of their resources in Iraq and Afghanistan might mean something killadoob. Have all out war, China will fail.
Their army has weapons you thought only existed in science fiction, they spend more money than the rest of the world combined in military. You think the USA won't win, because China has a larger army?

What about China vs Vietnam? Surely Vietnam would win because it has a larger army? :rolleyes:

Basically as someone once put "Comparing China's military with America's, America would be the modern Army, with China being in the 70's"
As for everything else, I'll leave it to PeterCH.
 
killadoob said:
Peter you talk of the chinese navy but fail to mention the chinese army.

You think the US would walk all over china in a war? What makes you think the US will walk all over the biggest army on the planet? Now add in Russia's army who would without a doubt side with china and you think the US will win the war? Let me tell you the US cannot and will not ever dream of attacking china.

The US cannot even win the war in Iraq and afghanistan now you think they can suddenly smash the chinese army, with what resources exactly?

Why would china and Russia have a war? If anything they will join forces against the US.
Click to expand...

Arguing with some people is difficult because they only see the short sighted picture. Obviously the US would not start a war with the PRC. However, if a war started the US would not send in guys with M16s and Abraham's tanks and land like on D-Day. They'd bomb China to the ground - destroying first China's air defence systems then at their will from bases in Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Philipines and Guam they'd at their leisure decimate China piece by piece - they'd destroy their industrial capabilities, infrastructure, power stations, etc. The Chinese people would revolt either directly or indirectly members of the Politburo would stage a coup and China would sign peace with the US.

This is the worst case scenario. Of course China has nuclear weapons. Would they use them knowing that virtually everyone in China would die if they did - most likely NOT. Could China hit the US which is far away - China has very little in tactical long range bomber capability - and none that is tested anyway - and their ICBMs are also old Soviet Based/untested technology.

I don't think a war between China and the US would errupt. Wars only errupt when a country has specific needs - Germany needed Lebensraum, Japan needed the same, Italy wanted to exert itself in Africa. Stalin wanted to spread the Soviet ideology into Europe.

What does China need?
China needs land and resources. Above all they need arable land.
Is the US a source of land for China?
Certainly it is doubtful that China a country with no blue water navy despite a cr@pload of bachelors in the army would not be able to land these guys in California without the US actually aiding them in doing it.
So where will China get land? Why on it's border, silly. China borders Russia - that's where the big conflict in Asia will be - as Russia's population declines and Chinese agricultural land is converted for industrial use there will be greater need for CHina to get land somewhere.
Not California because CHina owns so many US Dollars and US is China's No 1 partner. Hardly - and of course as said, it would be impossible.

On the other hand I don't see USA starting a war with China. With so many billions of Dollars invested in Chinese companies it would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The US will guarantee the independence of Taiwan and China will not attack it, unless the Taiwanese will want to re-unite and then they'll ask the US to leave. That may or may not happen. It is doubtful since life would get worse for the ordinary citizen in Taiwan - China is a huge country with a low GDP while Taiwan is a very rich country 1st world country with a tiny population.

Anyway this is all just BS to get more cash for the US navy etc.
 
killadoob said:
Well i guess when you have 3 odd millions troops to 1 million

http://www.futurefirepower.com/chinese-military-weapons-technology-of-the-pla

While the US's only real advantage is their aircraft carriers but the chinese subs and the OP would pretty much render them useless.

So the Us would be faced with 2 options, go in or nuke them, sadly i fear they may choose the nuke option.
Click to expand...

Then you contradicted yourself. USA would win.
Anyways, even without nukes, the USA would win.
 
You think American planes will just roll into china and bomb everything? china has great air defence and 2000 odd planes so i cannot see america just rollin into china and bombing the crap out of it like they did in iraq.

I never said the US nuking china would mean they win, it would be the kind of victory that spark a nuclear war, don't forget the Russians and china both dislike America so you nuke china you can sure there will be nukes landing in the US. China has the ability to land nukes in the US so the US may not escape the nuclear fall out either so who would win if they both nuked each toher?

Hmmm nobody.
 
Last edited:
Why do you assume China dislikes America?
And you just don't understand, their air defense can only hold so long.. And also, of all the country's that border China, how many of them are inclined to support the US?
Of all the country's that border the US, how many of them are inclined to to support China? Oh wait, never mind then, of all the country's that are near the US, oh wait, that as well, nobody. Oh no wait, Cuba, yeah, they could totally destroy America
 
killadoob said:
China has the ability to land nukes in the US so the US may not escape the nuclear fall out either so who would win if they both nuked each toher?
Click to expand...

China doesn't have those long range missiles, and if they did, they don't have the defense the American's have against missiles. And I think with American capabilities, China would be more devastated. Nuke Guandong province, China's industry is kapput
 
Another thing china has 210000 troops ready and waiting for submarine attacks with missiles capable of taking out cities.

210000 wow that is 20% of the US army under water and undetectable with nuclear weapons on board that could take out cities.

Insane for the US to attack them i reckon. China don't need long range missiles when they have flying supersonic nuclear ready missiles loaded in submarines. They fly low so cannot be detected by radar and they are twice the speed of sound.

That is scary if you ask me.
 
Aqua_lung said:
Too many US fanboys in this thread to give a realistic opinion.
Click to expand...

Either that are you're just to stupid to give a an argument.
Killadoob at least goes, may give valid arguments, even provide links sometimes.
You? You're just stupid, nothing to it
 
killadoob said:
You think American planes will just roll into china and bomb everything? china has great air defence and 2000 odd planes so i cannot see america just rollin into china and bombing the crap out of it like they did in iraq.
Click to expand...

I do see exactly that very scenario. It would be more difficult but they'd do it. There would be more casualties on the US side but it would happen. The US homeland would be safe from attack while China would be defending its own territory against drones, cruise missiles, conventional ballistic missiles, stealth bombers etc. That's how the US defeated Germany and Japan in WW2 and defeated Germany in WW1. Their homeland was safe - no matter what and that's what makes them a superpower. The Homeland is safe - except for a well co-ordinated nuclear attack but we're ignoring that very MAD scenario.

I never said the US nuking china would mean they win, it would be the kind of victory that spark a nuclear war, don't forget the Russians and china both dislike America so you nuke china you can sure there will be nukes landing in the US. China has the ability to land nukes in the US so the US may not escape the nuclear fall out either so who would win if they both nuked each toher?
Click to expand...

I ignored a nuclear exchange as I don't think either US nor China nor Russia would risk it. If a war were to errupt it would probably be conventional at least in the beginning.

I however see the US with a huge navy, and numerous bases and lots of allies in the region - Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Philippines, Australia, India etc
and China only having the support of Myanmar and North Korea.

Saddam Hussein also had a huge army - what good did it do for him? Hmmm.... this top notch Warsaw Pact ordnance which was used by the Iraqis, Libyans, Iranians, Syrians, Egyptians, etc well it was all just overhyped BS - the US (or US equipped Israel) went in and took these guys out.

The Russians have some nice equipment mind you and a war between Russia and the US on Russian soil would cost America dearly if America were to occupy Russia - but that type of war will never happen. The Russians and the Americans have an understanding and will never start a war against each other - however China does eye Russian territory and China does not like Russia at all. Russian's don't think too much of the Chinese either. If there is any country which has to really fear China - it is Russia.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X