Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,811 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
US taking a more aggressive stance in the region, or just more sabre rattling.
China will never abide by international maritime law unless all the nations that use these waters come together and force them to do so. Either by economic pressure or something a bit more hands on.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,127 Posts
It looks like both side are building to a confrontation - I hope we are ready for that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,417 Posts
People in the US really need to understand the "Nine-Dash-Line" theory, derisively called "The Cow's Tongue." The implications are huge, maybe the biggest territory grab in history. China has no legal basis for it whatsoever. The media are not keeping this travesty in the spotlight.

Basically, instead of the international agreement that countries own 12 miles off their shoreline, China is trying to claim 90% of the South China Sea, though which a huge portion of the world's shipping transits. It is also obviously a grab for Taiwan.

This would be like the US saying that it owns the Atlantic ocean from the top of Maine, down to Puerto Rico and over to the tip of Florida, or that it owns all of the Pacific from the western-most island of Alaska, down to Hawaii, and then over to San Diego.

The US keeps them from enforcing their claim by sending warships on routine patrols through the area, called, "Freedom of Navigation" missions. It is not to threaten the Chinese, it is to say, "See, we can go through here anytime we want, you do not own it." We do this in many other parts of the world, all the time. The Navy has long done so. It is one of the things the Navy does for the US, and the rest of the world: Preserve international waterways for everyone's use.

333589
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,501 Posts
I think that it's just going to be a long time "stand off" type scenario.
China always pushes to see who and what pushes back and to what degree.
Masters of divide and rule. They invented the strategy and have been using it for 1000 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,523 Posts
333606


Nuff said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldChap and Pete63

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
This reminds me of Japanese expansionism in the 1930's, just no physical invasion of sovereign territory or gunfire, yet. China is ambitious and growing in strength due to the economic boost given to them by American manufacturers and consumers (and other countries as well). They're using those funds to beef up their military capabilities. The longer we as a world community delay on putting their efforts in check, the bigger and more tragic the eventual confrontation will be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,044 Posts
Some how we've enabled China to achieve this level. I don't know if it started with slick Willy selling missile secrets to the Chinese or before but bit by bit and piece by piece certain administrations have allowed China to achieve what they never could with their hair brained communist economic schemes.
Now we got a guy wanting to be POTUS quoting Mao because some handler said it was time. Unbelievable.

China doesn't have to build an island in S.F bay. I think they already own a fair chunk of the whole state.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,127 Posts
China's history foretells its future, or, at least what it envisions. They are not in the game to improve the lot of man, just the lot of China - everyone else is a target.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
I thought about adding a new thread, BUT decided to "piggyback" on KC's thread because it relates to "rising tensions with China". Yesterday HFD was called to the Chinese Consulate because of reports of a large fire. They were refused entrance. The staff was burning "large amounts of documents" because the US is "booting them out TODAY"! "Very few details other than it relates to "protecting American intellectual property and American’s private information.” It did not provide any details.


China says US orders it to close consulate in Houston to ‘protect American intellectual property’ after officials respond to fire
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,182 Posts
This post could go in any of a few threads. May as well put it in the China one. The methods and goals of the CCP could also be posted in the Civil War threads, or any of the threads about how anarchists are attacking the US from within.

One of the neat things about being at the Pentagon is the ability to participate in many unique academic partnerships. For example, this abstract for a restricted audience session speaks to many of the issues raised here on Defensive Carry in this and other threads.

I won't post the lengthy materials or discussion outbrief, but to ensure I fairly present what the authors say without inaccurately shifting their meaning I'm sharing their abstract unedited by me. I have added underlining to focus your eyes on a few key aspects related to the "gray zone between peace and war", which bear a striking resemblance to tactics being used within the US by the likes of Antifa, BLM, and others pushing a far leftist/marxist ideology. Coincidence? I'm not much of a believer in "coincidence", but won't dive into other info that ties in with a correlation vs. causation discussion as that could be a thread all its own.
“Operationalising Deterrence in the Indo-Pacific”

Dr. David Santoro(Pacific Forum), Dr. Brendan Thomas-Noone (University of Sydney), and Dr. Ashley Townshend (University of Sydney)
Brief Description: In an increasingly contested Indo-Pacific, the United States, Australia and their regional allies and partners face a myriad of strategic challenges that cut across every level of the competitive space. Driven by China’s use of multidimensional coercion in pursuit of its aim to displace the United States as the region’s dominant power, a new era of strategic competition is unfolding. At stake is the stability and character of the Indo-Pacific order, hitherto founded on American power and longstanding rules and norms, all of which are increasingly uncertain.

The challenges that Beijing poses the region operate over multiple domains and are prosecuted by the Chinese Communist Party through a whole-of-nation strategy. In the grey zone between peace and war, tactics like economic coercion, foreign interference, the use of civil militias and other forms of political warfare have become Beijing’s tools of choice for pursuing incremental shifts to the geostrategic status quo. These efforts are compounded by China’s rapidly growing conventional military power and expanding footprint in the Western Pacific, which is raising the spectre of a limited war that America would find it difficult to deter or win. All of this is taking place under the lengthening shadow of Beijing’s nuclear modernisation and its bid for new competitive advantages in emerging strategic technologies.

Strengthening regional deterrence and counter-coercion in light of these challenges will require the United States and Australia — working independently, together and with their likeminded partners — to develop more integrated strategies for the Indo-Pacific region and novel ways to operationalise the alliance in support of deterrence objectives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,077 Posts
IF somebody elected me president, I would make it public that I had ordered ALL 14 of the Ohio Class SLBM's targeted on China. 3,360 Hiroshima's makes for a really bad day.

It worked on the Soviets. It would work on the Communists in China.

@graydude
My proposal is not economic coercion, it is a plain old promise of nuclear annihilation. I suspect even the hard liners understand that.

I can tell my patience is wearing thin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,417 Posts
IF somebody elected me president, I would make it public that I had ordered ALL 14 of the Ohio Class SLBM's targeted on China. 3,360 Hiroshima's makes for a really bad day.
FWIW, we only have 18 Ohio-class operational. Each can carry up to 24 Trident II missiles. About half of them need to stay in the Atlantic by treaty. Their payloads are not public knowledge. So we couldn't have 3,360 Hiroshimas, maybe a few hundred from the subs. But each detonation would be a lot more powerful and accurate than the Hiroshima bomb, so it could still be a real party!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,077 Posts
FWIW, we only have 18 Ohio-class operational. Each can carry up to 24 Trident II missiles. About half of them need to stay in the Atlantic by treaty. Their payloads are not public knowledge. So we couldn't have 3,360 Hiroshimas, maybe a few hundred from the subs. But each detonation would be a lot more powerful and accurate than the Hiroshima bomb, so it could still be a real party!
We have 14 SLBM's and 4 SSGN's. You were in the Navy. This is public knowledge, even for sailors. You're right that the number or type of MIRVS on each missile is classified. But 14 SLBMs times 24 D5's (or C4's) times the max published payload equals 3,360. I split the difference on MIRV capability between W76 and W88. You forget that I know a little bit about those Trident I or II models and MIRVs. Evidently Wikipedia knows a little more than you.


I won't go into details, but the W76 and W88 are dial a boomers, from quite a bit less than Hiroshima to quite a bit more.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top