plawolfThe rapidity is likely due to two factors:
1) Economics; they have more money to play with than they did, say, 20 years ago
2) Scale; the defense industry in China is simply enourmous. If Chengdu was responsible, for example, for producing the J-10, the J-11B, the KJ-2000, and the JH-7, then the upgrading of the PLAAF and PLANAF wouldn’t be nearly as rapid. Instead, you have four separate companies handling those projects. You’ve also got both Shanghai and Dalian producing naval vessels, and Huludao producing nuclear-powered submarines for the PLAN.
As for expansion, well, not really. There has been talk of carriers for years, but still no real evidence of any progress in that field. Take that element out of the equation and all you are left with is simply modernization. Carriers may not even be intended for true blue-water use either, but rather to perhaps surround Formosa or maintain control over the Spratlys. Neither of those would be indicative of actual intended expansion in my opinion.
Really, China is simply modernizing, albeit on a relatively rapid and wide-ranging scale. And again, that is mostly due to the fact that their legacy equipment may have been fielded in numbers, but is, comparatively and qualitatively speaking, not suitable for a modern conflict.
Well said!
plawolfGosh, this is awfully entertaining….where’s that popcorn emotioncon? 😀 😀 😀 Keep it up folks. 😀 😀 😀 :rolleyes: he gets paid by the alphabet… 😀 😀 😀
Who gets paid by who? And awh look! Someone just discovered the smilies function. Are we having fun making all the little cutesy faces? There there. 😀
plawolfYes. But note the selection of countries was in response to how the evil West picks on Muslim and gives “Christian” countries an easier time.
That just plainly makes no sense. I said the west in general find it hard to trust any culture that is significantly different, muslims have certainly born the brunt of that lately. Even with your examples, the vast majority of the people in the west still harbor distrust and even resentment towards many of those countries you listed. Just because the west and the US are forced to do business with these people does not mean that they trust or like them, let along accept their way of life.
Maybe it escaped your notice, but the US spent a large amount of time trying to avoid getting into ANY war, Europe as well as Japan. Nor did the Japanese share your rosy view that the US had to be forced into the war.
Have you ever read any history books whatsoever? :rolleyes: That is the single most stupid and ill-informed remark I have seen in a very long time. The US had no problems waging war on weak third world countries who they colonized with just as much zeal as any of the other colonial powers. Nor did the US have any problems jumping into WWI at the death. The US has never had a problem with war, especially wars they are all but guaranteed to win.
Had the Japanese not attacked, America might have entered the war, but only much much later, and it would have done so for its own national interests as opposed to some noble act to protect the innocent.
What do you want? First they are giving countries a difficult time because of religon, then it doesn’t matter because its “Oil and Geopolitics”.
Do you have a reading impairment? The west does not trust muslim nations and only deal with them out of necessity. How hard is that to understand? :rolleyes:
Please read the sentance and note the words “if” followed by “you”. The point was a reference to Iran, in case you couldn’t work it out. Remember, country in dispute with West, wants to wipe out Israel, ignores attempted extermiantion, etc.????
So Iran is representative of the muslim world? You still can’t seem to grasp the concept.
With Turkey you have a point, but then as Turkey doesn’t seem overly sure where its going at the moment, why would Europe want to let them in? I would also suggest there are other (non-western imperialism?) factors as well.
I never said western prejudices were the sole factor governing wester policy.
No, you chose to construe it that way. The West and US, nor for that matter Hong Kong or Taiwan didn’t force China to open it, it was a decision from themselves. The West have exploited it, as the Chinese have exploited Western markets.
So what was quip about 5 year plans then? Seemed like you were suggesting that if the west suddenly stopped dealing with China, China would revert back to its control economy ways. If that is not what you meant, then you should take more care with your words in future.
Again, you are choosing to misinterpret my words. I pointed out that such action woudl hurt both parties I DID NOT say that this is what we should do.
Its not about should, its about could. China is now so integrated into the world economy and playing such a big part that to exclude it willy nilly would devastate the world economy. To even suggest that cutting off all trade links with China as a viable policy option shows an astonishing lack of awareness about the current world dynamics. Its about as feasible as suggestion the world stopped using fossil fuels tomorrow and all switch to renewable.
You mean like China has moved on from WW2? All I’ve done it is tried to provide some interpretation on why things are the way they are and you choose to take it a personal effront to China/you/whoever, repsumably because it doesn’t fit your world view.
Yes, but your ‘interpretations’ all lack basis and depth to the point where they seem more like excuses.
I do not bother about making my words sound nice, I just call it as I see it.
China is still a restrictive state despite the reforms it has made and that will make a lot of people of nervous, Western or otherwise, especially when it is tied to the potential to be the next Superpower. Trust happens with time, not overnight….
Restrictive is a relative term, all states are restrictive to some degree. The west does not trust China because China is not like them and does not want to be like the west in all things, not because anyone seriously think China is a threat to world peace.
How is that of entirely of America’s making? The US is actually standing by the “side” it supported in a war from 60 years ago? This is of (both) China’s making and it will only come to war if China chooses to press its claims.
It is America’s making because the US put its 7th fleet in the strait to stop the Chinese taking Taiwan just like they did with Hainan. The US did not have to get involved in the Chinese civil war, but it did so, and created the awkward situation that China is faced with today.
Now we’re into what you mean by colonisation! Yes, there is plenty of western influence, but that influence, particularly commercial can be seen all over the world. Eating french fries and big macs does not make you US colony.
And how many country’s constitution did the US write? How many countries did the US occupy for decades? The US not only shaped how Japan would develop after WWII, but also stayed around to make sure things went the way they wanted. The same with Germany, and that was the whole point – to completely change the culture of the two defeated Axis powers that they would never again raise arms against the west. Its so far beyond mere fashion fads and commercialism that to even suggest it smacks of denial and spin.
Okay, its a single-party state repressive regime.
Again, a matter of perspective. All states restrict individual liberties to maintain social order. Who’s to say where the line must lie?
If you say so, in what ways?
Big Business have more power and influence in China then almost any other country in the world; the markets in China are the closest real life approximation to perfectly competitive in the world; there are far few state ‘safety net’ social welfare programmes then in many western nations.
The west mainly labile it as a command economy to gain extra powers to impose restrictions on Chinese imports to protect their home industries from competition.
This must go in with the “not buying Chinese” statment I apparantly made!
No, it is in response to your, ‘we can cut off all trade links with China if we want’.
The issue is not previous fights, but trust.
So what particularly untrustworthy things have China done in recent years to warrant such distrust from the west? Has China done anything in recent decades to suggest that it has its eye on world conquest? Because thats what trust really boils down to in the international level – peace.
Your actual words were to say that was IN the 400 year criteria:
Well that was a typo on my part, my apologies. But the meaning was still perfectly clear since I was pointing out the irrelevance of the Mongolian example.
So it has to be broken now? We were talking about challenging the domination of the west.
No, we were talking about threatening western dominance, not merely challenge it. Every tribe or army that stood against a western army is challenging the dominance of the west, to threaten western dominance, you have to have a credible ability to break it.
Had Japan been in Germany’s place, then it would have seriously threatened western dominance of the world. But all it did was take a few far off colonies from western powers who had more immediate concerns closer to home. It was never in a position to threaten the home soil of western powers, so it had little chance of forcing the west to yield.
Actually he provided another example of non-Western culture and its influence on the Western world. Instead of being arguementative why not ask him what he meant by Mongolia? It may have been a typo….
He has had plenty of time and opportunity to example himself if I have wronged him. So stop dreaming up excuses and start facing the facts.
PS: I hope you are not constantly rolling your eyes in face-to-face.
Only when someone says something immensely silly.
plawolfYou must be kidding? China is building Stealthy Destroyers, Modern Fighters, Tanks, SSN’s, SSBN’s, and even serious talk of building Large Super Carriers! Sorry, but the ARMS RACE is already on with much of South East Asian buying weapons like crazy…………..:(
China is doing a lot of the R&D ground work now, but are only placing large orders on a handful of the most successful and useful items. It is laying the foundations for when its economy is big enough to support the weapons.
That is the key difference between China and the USSR. The Soviets put arms ahead of almost all else, whereas the Chinese reserve that place for its economy. The Chinese will only buy arms that its economy can effortlessly sustain in the long term. If something is too expansive and is not urgently needed, then it will be shelved until a date when the Chinese economy is much stronger, and the weapons themselves are also much cheaper in real terms. That is why the PLAN all but mothballed its SSN and SSBN production programmes until recent decades, why the PLA ICBM force is only recently being modernized, why the army is using the Type96 as its main tank as opposed to the far superior Type99 etc.
China is the last country to want an arms race with anyone except maybe Taiwan at present, but it is making good use of its time all the same.
plawolfA training device.
I’ve never seen it anywhere else but in pics of tank training school.
I thought that was a laser sensor to pick up hostile laser beams that are directed at the tank. :confused:
plawolfYour right there plawolf, always this fixation with the Russian weapon systems in PLA service whilst ignoring the amazing progress in local arms production. Some millitary publications are just as guilty of this as civilian ones!:(
I think its part of the cold war hangup, where people think that Russian stuff is super-cool because Russian weapons have a history and reputation whereas Chinese weapons don’t.
Although they may also be doing so for the benefit of their readers, as the mention of multi-billion dollar Russian arms buys are going to sound more awe-inspiring then some strange Chinese named aircraft/ship most of their readers can’t even pronounce.
plawolfWell yes I did mention Japan because that was the first occurrence within the last century of a time when the western dominance and superiority was challenged.
Challenged but not broken. The same with the Soviets.
If you want to get Historical and start mentioning Mongols I would like to mention the Persians, if you think the Persian Empire did not challenge and even influence world views and teachings Chinese, Indian, English, Spanish or otherwise then please go back to school.
If you wish to go even further back and actually be more informed then can I point you to the Egyptians? Although they were not Asian they were/are non European.
Even Herodotus attributes/thanks the Egyptians for the rise of Greek culture, philosophy and technology.
You were the one who first brought up Mongolia for no good reason, now you are throwing a childish tantrum over it. One really most wonder. :rolleyes:
So serious I would suggest people stop blaming the western world for their own ill informed opines.
From where I’m standing, you seem to be the one who is lashing out at others for your own failings. :rolleyes:
plawolfYes, indeed – US/UK support for Iran (Shah) and Iraq (Saddam) was in view of their enlightened approach to open and free societies, oh and of course being such strong Christian countries as well.
Oil and geopolitical needs, or did you think they were doing it out of the goodness of their hearts?
And of course the Americans were in no way influenced in their arguements with Japan by Japanese treatment of China?
And how many years have the Japanese been slaughtering Chinese, Koreans and every other Asian people they invaded before the US decided to get involved in the war? And even then it was because the Japanese forced war upon them. The suffering of innocents might have influenced American decisions to some degree, but obviously it wasn’t enough.
Yet the US maintains reasonable relations with a number of Gulf states and they’re all lovey-dovey with Pakistan again.
Again, oil and geopolitics. Pakistan is a good example example of where the west is supporting a government because that government is about as pro-western as they are likely to get. The same as what the case with the Shah and Saddam, at least to start with.
Of course if your idea of being Muslim is Jew-baiting, (does Israel count as an easy ride?) then yes, you’ll get a harder time from Israel’s chief ally.
What the hell are you on about? You think all muslims are jew-haters or something? :rolleyes:
There are plenty of examples of countries being discriminated against because of their religion, take Turkey as an example, with all the trouble they have had trying to join th EU.
How else was it going to start than with China opening up (a bit of westernisation perhaps?)?
I don’t know, you are the one who made it sound like it was the US and the west that dragged China kicking and screaming to where it is now.
And, the Western companies are there and you cannot tell me the Chinese don’t want them, nor for that matter wouldn’t miss them?
Why should I? You were the one saying that the west could go back to having zero trade with China as if the west don’t need Chinese goods.
What exactly do you expect? Despite its free-market pretentions, China is still a communist regime (remember the Red Peril, Red Bear,e tc?) and got to be China by defeating the faction supported by the US.
Who don’t you come back when you have moved on from the cold war? :rolleyes:
China is communist in name only. Its more capitalist then the majority of western ‘capitalist’ countries. And given the number of countries the US has invaded or gone to war with in its history, if they don’t trade with anyone who they have fought with, then they can’t trade with many countries at all.
Also, its not just the military stuff, a lot of the items on the ban list are for civilian uses.
Who here actually think China would want to pick a fight with the US? The only issue of contention between the two that might lead to war in the foreseeable future is Taiwan, and that is entirely of America’s making.
So now you expect them just to export their high tech to someone they don’t completely trust (probably something to do with Taiwan in there). And while we’re at it, the US isn’t fond of sharing all its high-tech with its close allies, so don’t feel China is the odd one out.
Thats my point. The west will never fully trust any nation that is not westernized in its mindset and ways. After all, you see no such qualms with regard to German, Japan or Italy do you?
Indeed not, and the question came over more sarcastic than intended (it wasn’t intended at all:o ). Nor, in case swerve thinks I’m insulting his good lady, was I being derogatory! I was curious where the boundary lies – I think the Japanese are one of the most distinctive peoples in the world, based on my limited experienced, and while they certainly do have some of the trappings of the Western World have never personally put them in that catagory. Perhaps its that there history is so distinct – after all most of the Western world has derived from European colonisation and control, but Japan hasn’t (well post-war might be more contentious there….)
Thats fair enough, but you are mistaken if you think Japan was somehow spared western colonization. It was American gunboat diplomacy that prompted Japanese Industrialization and Imperialism as a means to emulate the west’s success. And post-WWII American occupation and the US drafted constitution all helped to make it into a western nation in appearance, institution and mindset.
I see a comment about the 1904-1905 Russo-Japanese war and Mongolia, not Mongol empire (which is surely outside the 400 year period anyway). If I’ve misunderstood something, please enlighten me.
The 1904-05 war was about Manchuria and north eastern Chinese port city of Dalian, not Mongolia. So you will have to ask Matt what he meant with that odd sentence, because I took it as him listing the Japanese and Mongolians as two examples, which I then dismissed because the Mongol Empire was in the 1200-1400s, which falls outside of the 400 years limit.
plawolfHow are relations between South Korea and Tawian. As the KDX-III are the most powerful Aegis Destroyers going…………Really, closer to a Aegis Cruiser in size and firepower!:diablo:
Nowhere near as good as those with China. You’d have a better chance of the S Koreans selling the KDX-III to the PRC then you would Taiwan.
If Taiwan does get those Aegis DDGs and also get their new subs sometime within our lifetimes, then they would have all the assets needed to support a carrier or two. Get some F35Bs or Cs and a couple of decent sized carriers and they could have some moving airfields out in the pacific that the PLA would be hard pressed to hit conventionally.
But with all the rumors of a PLA AShBM programme, that might not be as attractive an option as if would have been a few months ago.
plawolf60-years ago maybe, supporting Chaing Kai-Shek. Do you really think they care what China are as long as they are not a (perceived threat).
The peoples and governments of western nations see anything different as a perceived threat, either physically or morally. You can be black or brown or yellow, but as long as you pay homage to the western values of ‘human rights’, ‘free press’ and ‘democracy’ etc as defined by the west then thats fine, you’ll be tolerated. But no matter what color you are, if you are seen as not adhering to those values, you are a threat.
Do you think being Christian (or Jewish) will make a difference if they ARE seen as a significant threat?
Well it certainly won’t help your case if you happen to be Muslim or atheist. And predominately Christian countries get a slightly easier ride on account of their religion.
How so. Its funny that the west, the US in particular, has been quite happy – to a degree – to help China get to the place it is. Now it may be to keep the folks back home happy (cheap goods) and “control” China’s growth, but the US adn Western Europe stands to suffer greatly if China goes wrong. So what do you want. WE could go back to don’ trust the Chinese, don’t trade with them, etc. and let them carry on with their 5-year plans and see where the economy goes, but where else was that money coming from.
You need to brush up on your history mate. It was not the west that helped kick start the Chinese economy, it was the decision of the Chinese government of open up the economy and create a business friendly environment that started the process, and it was overseas Chinese businessmen from HK and Taiwan and other Asian countries like Japan that were the first to invest in China. Western companies only started to move in in force after they saw the kind of profits that were up for grabs.
The US and the west did not actively ‘help’ China get to where it is today, if anything, they actively tried to slow and contain China’s growth even to this day with export restrictions on advanced technologies and deliberate policies to keep China out of international co-operative research projects like the ISS etc.
As for not trading with China. Well why don’t go go through your weekly shopping, wardrobe and appliances and try picking out the ones without any Chinese content and see if you can survive with just those items before suggesting you can live without China so lightly. :rolleyes:
Please define westernised. If they are, they are the least Westernised Westerners I’ve ever met.
Every western nation has its own national traits and customs, or do you consider the French and British to be identical in all things? They are westernized, not colonized.
Who mentioned Mongolian Empire?
Could you not read? What did Mat say again? :rolleyes:
plawolfI would put my money on Japans defeat of Russia, 1904-1905 for mongolia as the ‘first “non-european” country for 400 years’ to have broken the yoke of western capitalism.
Japan was ‘westernised’ in everything but breed, yet there was still strong xenophobic paranoia in western nations right up to the point when their economy ran into a brick wall . It was that which finally dispelled western fears – that Japan had been shown to have reached the limit of their powers, and that limit was still behind that of the western standard bearer the USA.
As for mongolia, well you need to brush up on your history and maths skills. The mongolian empire was from 1206 – 1405. In the early 1900s, mongolia was little more then a forgotten backwater. Even if you mean the 1400s, that was still comfortably within the ‘400 years’ criteria.
plawolfThe report is balanced your right, but there are certain things I do not agree with so much. The Asymetric warfare approach would work if you are fighting an occupying force but america doesnt want to occupy China, just send it back to the stone age, and or ruin chinas economy.
Asymmetric warfare in the context that the PLA sees it is almost unrecognizable from the general stereotypical view of a rebel with an RPG. It would probably be best described as views on post-modern warfare. Its about breaking the standard ‘mold’ in which ‘conventional’ militarys try to fight a war.
Past examples include American soldiers using sniping and hit and run tactics as opposed to the standard way of warfare where two opposing armies line up and have a marksmanship contest, at which the rag tag American forces had next to no chance of winning. And the German blitzkrieg tactic that still dominates world military strategies.
Have a read at what is being suggested instead of passing judgment with inaccurate perceptions.
plawolfIt should be noted that the economist, although in my opinion the best current affairs magazine in publication, is a broad spectrum news paper as such on topics such as this it is only intending to provide a brief over view for the casual observer rather than an in depth analysis.
I know, I have a subscription. 😉
Its a good way to find out the general trends, but you have to use far more specialized sources if you want to learn the details of anything. I view it as a bulletin service that keeps you up to date with all the major trends and developments, but little more.
plawolfA decent article, but dated because the meat of it seems to be based on info no later then 2005, with only a sprinkling of more recent events that seemed to have been largely ignored when drawing the conclusions.
Like the majority of western publications, it is also fixated on the Russian weaponry and all but ignores Chinese weapons at a time when the PLA is favoring locally produced kit more and more over the Russian ones.
Its a good summery of the past, but is still 2 or 3 years behind the curve of what is actually happening.
plawolfThere’s a HUGE difference between lifting a ship by going off UNDER it and simply nudging the ship from the side. One might put a dent in the side while the other snaps you in two.
Depends on if the weapon detonates before or after impact. If the missile explodes after impact, the blast would be under water, together with the sheer physical energy from its speed, such an explosion might be just as destructive as a conventional torpedo. But the effective radius is hard to say.
Sign In
