China rioting over Japanese territorial disputes (43 Photos)

  • Cartwright

    Fuck the Chinese and every other communist country that thinks they America should follow in their footsteps! We're heading this way, wake up and vote for the right person! Let's put an American back in office!!!!

  • IrishWolfhound

    #44 Carriers are completely obsolete. Nothing but big targets for modern supersonic anti-ship missiles and silent diesel-electric subs.

    • Iceman2509

      With all the safety nets around the carriers, they can pretty much roam the world without fear. Each carrier group has two attack subs patrolling the perimeter. If a foreign sub got any where near the carrier group, the US attack subs would be all over them.
      Having the ability to park an air wing that is larger than 70% of the worlds air forces on an enemies shores is priceless. The US has the ability to park 12 of them off China's coast. Carriers will the be dominant naval vessel for the forseeable future.

      • JacktheCANDADIAN

        well said sir.

      • IrishWolfhound

        American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk – a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.

        By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.

        According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy.

        The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.
        Source: Mail Online.

        • Iceman2509

          You have to put that in context. The Song class sub is a shallow water sub with limited distance due to the lack of range. It is more of a defensive sub that is meant to protect the shoreline of China.
          If anything this incident was a stupid move by the Chinese Navy as it showed the US Navy a weakness that has since been corrected. If the US ever intended on sitting a US carrier within the coastal waters of China, they would effectively send more attack subs to stalk and eliminate the Chinese vessels. The China subs are no match for our attack subs.
          Problem solved. That is why the Navy conducts war games.

          • Obama

            one Chinese DF-21D anti-ship missile= 4,500 dead american sailors

          • IrishWolfhound

            It is just one weakness of modern aircraft carriers. With the proliferation of more and more Sub and Supersonic anti-ship missiles the future battlefield is going to become completely unsurvivable for the supercarrier. Supersonic Anti-ship missiles like Onix or BrahMos cannot be intercepted by most anti-missile systems. Also such missiles are comparatively cheap to produce. A nation could fire four BrahMos missiles (priced at only a few million USD) and if even one hits your multi-billion dollar aircraft carrier is, at best, out of the fight and at worst sunk, along with its aircraft, personnel and ancillary equipment.

            • Iceman2509

              I hear what you're saying, but it is naive to think that the US Navy doesn't have or isn't developing new ways to defend against such attacks.
              The US Navy wouldn't send an aircraft carrier into harms way unless they felt all possible threats had been eliminated. That includes the DF-21D missile.
              But this is a real threat the US Navy needs to combat.

              • IrishWolfhound

                The U.S Navy and other weapons designers around the world like Bofors and Oerlikon/Reinmettal have been working on some innovative designs, however the ballistic nature of the DF-21D is a gamechanger.

                The US Department of Defense has stated that China has developed and reached initial operating capability of a conventionally-armed high hypersonic and land-based anti-ship ballistic missile based on the DF-21. This would be the world's first ASBM and the world's first weapons system capable of targeting a moving aircraft carrier strike group from long-range, land-based mobile launchers. These would combine maneuverable reentry vehicles (MaRVs) with some kind of terminal guidance system. Such a missile may have been tested in 2005-6, and the launch of the Jianbing-5/YaoGan-1 and Jianbing-6/YaoGan-2 satellites would give the Chinese targeting information from SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) and visual imaging respectively. The upgrades would greatly enhance China's ability to conduct sea-denial operations to prevent US carriers from intervening in the Taiwan Strait.

                United States Naval Institute in 2009 stated that such a warhead would be large enough to destroy an aircraft carrier in one hit and that there was "currently … no defense" against it" if it worked as theorized. –U. S. Naval Institute, March 31, 2009.

                • Iceman2509

                  Yeah, I read that as well. But, I also read other articles published in the last two years that down play the capabilities of these missiles for numerous reasons. The first being that is made in China, but more importantly since it has electronics onboard our electronic counter measures would be able to eithe confuse the targeting system or jam it completely.
                  We have eyes and ears on the entire country of China and we would be able to see a launch of one of these missles. As soon as we saw one, we would begin tracking and delploying counter measures.
                  Again, if the shit ever hit the fan, our Navy wouldn't get near the coast or within range until our stealth bombers and fighter neutralized air defense, radar, SAM and now these new missles. Once we take them out, we can park all our carriers on the coast and have at it.
                  At least that is how I would want it to play out.

                  • IrishWolfhound

                    ''The first being that is made in China'' Yeah, underestimate your enemy, historically thats always worked out well. The chinese might not have electronics and computer tech on par with the majority of the west but they are catching up faster every year. However, like i said its also a question of scale. These weapons are comparatively cheap to mass produce. If they produce them in the hundreds, some of that firepower is gonna stick. The germans had a technological edge in world war 2, and they were defeated by a giant wave of russian steel. Remember, it's always best to operate under the assumption that your enemy can hurt you.

                    • Iceman2509

                      I completely agree. The China comment was meant to be a joke.
                      As it stands right now, China's military budget is a fraction of ours and the current problems China is facing means more than likely they will have to cut back on their spending as we will likely do.
                      China has a long way to go to match us. But you are correct never underestimate your enemy. Hitler and the Nazis did all throughout WWII. Had he been more cautious and relied on his commanders more, the eastern front could have been much different.
                      I like to think we have one gigantic advantage of China moment. We have millions of combat veterans serving which is huge. Also, if war did breakout, I think the Norman Schwartkopf strategy would be applied. Use a sledgehammer to swat a fly.

                    • IrishWolfhound

                      America does have a lot of well trained and highly motivated soldiers serving. However, it's mismanagement and corruption at the high levels of the DoD that leads to badly regulated military projects that turn into endless money sinks. A lot of that money would be better served going towards better body-armour and small arms. At the end of the day it's your infantry that have to go in and plant the flag. The modern American military is putting too much faith in super weapons.

  • Overdog

    In 2004, the Swedish government received a request from the United States of America to lease HMS Gotland – Swedish-flagged, commanded and manned, for a duration of one year for use in anti-submarine warfare exercises. The Swedish government granted this request in October 2004, with both navies signing a memorandum of understanding on March 21, 2005. The lease was extended for another 12 months in 2006. In July 2007, HMS Gotland departed San Diego for Sweden.

    HMS Gotland managed to snap several pictures of the USS Ronald Reagan during a wargaming exercise in the Pacific Ocean, effectively "sinking" the aircraft carrier. The exercise was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the US Fleet against diesel-electric submarines, which some have noted as severely lacking

  • Bond, JMes

    China wouldn't risk the economic suicide that would result from a war with the US. Even if they did, we have the most powerful military in the history of man, we would crush them.

  • ThatNorwegianDude

    THAT is the way to protect another country's embassy, EVEN though you are in a territorial dispute with them! Not like every middle eastern country almost just letting the protestors trash and kill embassy employees!!!!!

blog comments powered by Disqus
Back to the top