# China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says



## (R)IGHTeous 1

What will Obama do? Likely NOTHING.  Perhaps negotiate a new Suicide Time Again Regression Treaty.......


China's military is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers, a weapon that specialists say gives Beijing new power-projection capabilities that will affect U.S. support for its Pacific allies.

Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, disclosed to a Japanese newspaper on Sunday that the new anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is now in the early stages of deployment after having undergone extensive testing.

"An analogy using a Western term would be 'initial operational capability (IOC),' whereby I think China would perceive that it has an operational capability now, but they continue to develop it," Adm. Willard told the Asahi Shimbun. "I would gauge it as about the equivalent of a U.S. system that has achieved IOC."

China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says - Washington Times


----------



## rdean

What will Obama do?  What did Bush do?  It takes years to develop such technology.  Unless you just give it to them.  

From 2001 to 2008, Republicans moved millions of jobs to China.  For those people to learn how to build hi tech, they needed someone to "teach" them first.  That cost money.  

Bush created trillions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.  The right ALWAYS says the rich would use that money to create jobs.  Well, they were right.  Jobs WERE created.  IN CHINA!

And the right always think they know how to negotiate.  Isn't that hilarious?  Trillions to rich people and not a touch, not a trace of negotiation to make sure they spend it here.  Too damn hilarious.  Trillions in new debt to make jobs in China.  And they say they love this country.  Yet they are worse than our enemies.


----------



## High_Gravity

Righteous your avatar is hilarious!


----------



## martybegan

Every time I see these "ZOMG TEH BADGUYZE HAZ TEH KILLZR STUFF NAO"  posts I get a chuckle. 

Since one ape beat another with a stick (and the next ape to be beaten with a stick wore a coconut as a helmet) warfare has always been about the offense getting some new toy, and the defense figuring out away to make it worthless (or in reverse.)  Mines were supposed to make naval warfare impossible, until they made minesweepers. Torpedoes were to render battleships obsolete, until they made torpedo boat destroyers. Tanks were supposed to make infantry useless, until they made anti-tank weapons, anti-tank weapons were supposed to spell the end of tanks, until they made better armor.

Its all cyclical.


----------



## Trajan

example-   Chinese military communications ability,from  networking to chips to fiber was enhanced by orders of magnitude when?


----------



## Sallow

martybegan said:


> Every time I see these "ZOMG TEH BADGUYZE HAZ TEH KILLZR STUFF NAO"  posts I get a chuckle.
> 
> Since one ape beat another with a stick (and the next ape to be beaten with a stick wore a coconut as a helmet) warfare has always been about the offense getting some new toy, and the defense figuring out away to make it worthless (or in reverse.)  Mines were supposed to make naval warfare impossible, until they made minesweepers. Torpedoes were to render battleships obsolete, until they made torpedo boat destroyers. Tanks were supposed to make infantry useless, until they made anti-tank weapons, anti-tank weapons were supposed to spell the end of tanks, until they made better armor.
> 
> Its all cyclical.



Well yeah..

Which basically scuttles the OP pretty nicely.


----------



## uscitizen

So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?


----------



## kiwiman127

Hmmm,,,The US spends 650 billion annually on defense, China spends around 100 billion annually.
While the US has troops and miltiary resources spread around the world protecting it's "interests", China develops a new weapon.  Seems to me that the US isn't using that $650 billion annually very well.
So what is the US going to do?  Add more billions in spending?  The US already spends more money on defense than the rest of the world combined. And then there's the fact that the US is the world's biggest debtor.
The USSR went down because of the 40 year expensive Arms Race.  Now the US is in an Arms Race with itself and it's not managing that to well per example of China's new toy.     
Maybe our Defense Department needs new focuses and learn use funding more properly?


----------



## Sallow

uscitizen said:


> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?



Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

rdean said:


> What will Obama do?  What did Bush do?  It takes years to develop such technology.  Unless you just give it to them.
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, Republicans moved millions of jobs to China.  For those people to learn how to build hi tech, they needed someone to "teach" them first.  That cost money.
> 
> Bush created trillions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.  The right ALWAYS says the rich would use that money to create jobs.  Well, they were right.  Jobs WERE created.  IN CHINA!
> 
> And the right always think they know how to negotiate.  Isn't that hilarious?  Trillions to rich people and not a touch, not a trace of negotiation to make sure they spend it here.  Too damn hilarious.  Trillions in new debt to make jobs in China.  And they say they love this country.  Yet they are worse than our enemies.



I love how you try to absolve the Jackass Congress of the last 3 years, kinda shits on your argument right there.

While I've been busy pwning your oblivious lefty comrades, I've been watching you, and I gotta say.......

*You parrot nothing but Bush Derangement Syndrome, and DNC talkin points, your "blame Bush" tactics are played out.*

Get a brain, or stay outta my threads.  You make em look reeeal bad.


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

High_Gravity said:


> Righteous your avatar is hilarious!



LOL you JUST NOW noticing?

Thanks tho, so true too.  I love his facial "expression" he looks like the fuckin Down Syndrome baby lmao.


----------



## Sallow

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> What will Obama do?  What did Bush do?  It takes years to develop such technology.  Unless you just give it to them.
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, Republicans moved millions of jobs to China.  For those people to learn how to build hi tech, they needed someone to "teach" them first.  That cost money.
> 
> Bush created trillions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.  The right ALWAYS says the rich would use that money to create jobs.  Well, they were right.  Jobs WERE created.  IN CHINA!
> 
> And the right always think they know how to negotiate.  Isn't that hilarious?  Trillions to rich people and not a touch, not a trace of negotiation to make sure they spend it here.  Too damn hilarious.  Trillions in new debt to make jobs in China.  And they say they love this country.  Yet they are worse than our enemies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love how you try to absolve the Jackass Congress of the last 3 years, kinda shits on your argument right there.
> 
> While I've been busy pwning your oblivious lefty comrades, I've been watching you, and I gotta say.......
> 
> *You parrot nothing but Bush Derangement Syndrome, and DNC talkin points, your "blame Bush" tactics are played out.*
> 
> Get a brain, or stay outta my threads.  You make em look reeeal bad.
Click to expand...


Naw..you do just fine on your lonesome..


----------



## uscitizen

Sallow said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
Click to expand...


Like iPhones and our computers?


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

martybegan said:


> Every time I see these "ZOMG TEH BADGUYZE HAZ TEH KILLZR STUFF NAO"  posts I get a chuckle.
> 
> Since one ape beat another with a stick (and the next ape to be beaten with a stick wore a coconut as a helmet) warfare has always been about the offense getting some new toy, and the defense figuring out away to make it worthless (or in reverse.)  Mines were supposed to make naval warfare impossible, until they made minesweepers. Torpedoes were to render battleships obsolete, until they made torpedo boat destroyers. Tanks were supposed to make infantry useless, until they made anti-tank weapons, anti-tank weapons were supposed to spell the end of tanks, until they made better armor.
> 
> Its all cyclical.



Then I highly look forward to the Obama admin's tough, hastened, R&D of said counter tech. that you have no doubt will immediately be deployed by this tough, no nonsense, cut throat admin.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................anytime now.............................................................................................


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

Sallow said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> What will Obama do?  What did Bush do?  It takes years to develop such technology.  Unless you just give it to them.
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, Republicans moved millions of jobs to China.  For those people to learn how to build hi tech, they needed someone to "teach" them first.  That cost money.
> 
> Bush created trillions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.  The right ALWAYS says the rich would use that money to create jobs.  Well, they were right.  Jobs WERE created.  IN CHINA!
> 
> And the right always think they know how to negotiate.  Isn't that hilarious?  Trillions to rich people and not a touch, not a trace of negotiation to make sure they spend it here.  Too damn hilarious.  Trillions in new debt to make jobs in China.  And they say they love this country.  Yet they are worse than our enemies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love how you try to absolve the Jackass Congress of the last 3 years, kinda shits on your argument right there.
> 
> While I've been busy pwning your oblivious lefty comrades, I've been watching you, and I gotta say.......
> 
> *You parrot nothing but Bush Derangement Syndrome, and DNC talkin points, your "blame Bush" tactics are played out.*
> 
> Get a brain, or stay outta my threads.  You make em look reeeal bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Naw..you do just fine on your lonesome..
Click to expand...


Pwning you and your ilk?  Thanks, I know, it's why I have teh belt.  Step your game up and maybe you can earn your way off it one day.


----------



## rdean

Sallow said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
Click to expand...


Republican investment will make sure of it.


----------



## zzzz

China is becoming a regional superpower in order to secure Taiwan. That is the main focus of everything they do. From Korea to building thier economic might they are building a foundation to run the USA out of southeast Asia in the next 20 years. After that maybe the world but for right now their main focus is getting back what they percieve is theirs.


----------



## martybegan

kiwiman127 said:


> Hmmm,,,The US spends 650 billion annually on defense, China spends around 100 billion annually.
> While the US has troops and miltiary resources spread around the world protecting it's "interests", China develops a new weapon.  Seems to me that the US isn't using that $650 billion annually very well.
> So what is the US going to do?  Add more billions in spending?  The US already spends more money on defense than the rest of the world combined. And then there's the fact that the US is the world's biggest debtor.
> The USSR went down because of the 40 year expensive Arms Race.  Now the US is in an Arms Race with itself and it's not managing that to well per example of China's new toy.
> Maybe our Defense Department needs new focuses and learn use funding more properly?



The numbers are often decieving, as China avoids labor costs by conscripting most of its soldiers and paying them absolute crap.  We pay our people well, and that costs $$.

An additonal cost is that the american way of warfare is very material intensive, but designed to limit casualties. A chinese generals approach to an attack would be to overwhelm it with numbers. An americans approach would be to bomb it, hit it with rockets, then tube artillery, then tanks, then bomb it again, and finally send some infantrymen to see if anything is left.


----------



## rdean

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love how you try to absolve the Jackass Congress of the last 3 years, kinda shits on your argument right there.
> 
> While I've been busy pwning your oblivious lefty comrades, I've been watching you, and I gotta say.......
> 
> *You parrot nothing but Bush Derangement Syndrome, and DNC talkin points, your "blame Bush" tactics are played out.*
> 
> Get a brain, or stay outta my threads.  You make em look reeeal bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Naw..you do just fine on your lonesome..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pwning you and your ilk?  Thanks, I know, it's why I have teh belt.  Step your game up and maybe you can earn your way off it one day.
Click to expand...


From 2001 to 2008, millions of American jobs were moved to China.  A country of rice farmers living in rice paddies.  To build American factories costs billions and billions of dollars over years.  Where do you think that came from?  Don't be such a dumbass.  Think of my posts as "teaching moments".

http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...or-gop-how-to-outsource-us-jobs-to-china.html


----------



## kiwiman127

martybegan said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm,,,The US spends 650 billion annually on defense, China spends around 100 billion annually.
> While the US has troops and miltiary resources spread around the world protecting it's "interests", China develops a new weapon.  Seems to me that the US isn't using that $650 billion annually very well.
> So what is the US going to do?  Add more billions in spending?  The US already spends more money on defense than the rest of the world combined. And then there's the fact that the US is the world's biggest debtor.
> The USSR went down because of the 40 year expensive Arms Race.  Now the US is in an Arms Race with itself and it's not managing that to well per example of China's new toy.
> Maybe our Defense Department needs new focuses and learn use funding more properly?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The numbers are often decieving, as China avoids labor costs by conscripting most of its soldiers and paying them absolute crap.  We pay our people well, and that costs $$.*
> An additonal cost is that the american way of warfare is very material intensive, but designed to limit casualties. A chinese generals approach to an attack would be to overwhelm it with numbers. An americans approach would be to bomb it, hit it with rockets, then tube artillery, then tanks, then bomb it again, and finally send some infantrymen to see if anything is left.
Click to expand...


That's a good point,,,but it seems China is changing that too!  Here's a link to an interesting article about China's approach.

*Chinese military to pay cash bonuses to keep officers*
Chinese military to pay cash bonuses to keep officers - Asia, World - The Independent

Regarding your second point,,,unlike the US, China isn't active in any wars so it's hard to surmise their current approach.  And as you point out, the US practices overkill.  As the link article points out China is going for the more technical approach for a military encounter.


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

zzzz said:


> China is becoming a regional superpower in order to secure Taiwan. That is the main focus of everything they do. From Korea to building thier economic might they are building a foundation to run the USA out of southeast Asia in the next 20 years. After that maybe the world but for right now their main focus is getting back what they percieve is theirs.



And we have to stop them.


----------



## kiwiman127

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is becoming a regional superpower in order to secure Taiwan. That is the main focus of everything they do. From Korea to building thier economic might they are building a foundation to run the USA out of southeast Asia in the next 20 years. After that maybe the world but for right now their main focus is getting back what they percieve is theirs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to stop them.
Click to expand...


And your solution for stopping the Chinese?


----------



## Sallow

zzzz said:


> China is becoming a regional superpower in order to secure Taiwan. That is the main focus of everything they do. From Korea to building thier economic might they are building a foundation to run the USA out of southeast Asia in the next 20 years. After that maybe the world but for right now their main focus is getting back what they percieve is theirs.



Not exactly.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

Those of you that know me from other forums know that I have been saying this for years - China is the greatest threat to American power than the rest of the world put together.
China has the patience of a saint. They would think nothing of developing a 100 year plan to dominate the world. It wouldn't bother a typical Chinese leader for a second if he never sees the benefit of his lifes work in his lifetime.
Americans on the other hand have zero patience. We actually have "negative" pateince, it doesn't bother a typical American leader for a second knowing he/she is hurting the future to solve an issue today.


----------



## uscitizen

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is becoming a regional superpower in order to secure Taiwan. That is the main focus of everything they do. From Korea to building thier economic might they are building a foundation to run the USA out of southeast Asia in the next 20 years. After that maybe the world but for right now their main focus is getting back what they percieve is theirs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to stop them.
Click to expand...


Why?


----------



## Wry Catcher

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> What will Obama do? Likely NOTHING.  Perhaps negotiate a new Suicide Time Again Regression Treaty.......
> 
> 
> China's military is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers, a weapon that specialists say gives Beijing new power-projection capabilities that will affect U.S. support for its Pacific allies.
> 
> Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, disclosed to a Japanese newspaper on Sunday that the new anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is now in the early stages of deployment after having undergone extensive testing.
> 
> "An analogy using a Western term would be 'initial operational capability (IOC),' whereby I think China would perceive that it has an operational capability now, but they continue to develop it," Adm. Willard told the Asahi Shimbun. "I would gauge it as about the equivalent of a U.S. system that has achieved IOC."
> 
> China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says - Washington Times



Be scared.  Be very very scared.  And don't forget to hate the Chinese (they're not white people).
We need more weapons, bigger nukes, more nukes, small nukes too.  Because they're out to get us.  The Russians too, and don't forget the Muslims, Arabs, North Koreans and Iranians.  Be scared.  Hate.  Remember, being scared and hating others will make you free.


----------



## uscitizen

Could this being brought up have anything at all to do with possible upcoming military cuts?

Be fearful tools people, be fearful tools serving others.


----------



## Sallow

iamwhatiseem said:


> Those of you that know me from other forums know that I have been saying this for years - China is the greatest threat to American power than the rest of the world put together.
> China has the patience of a saint. They would think nothing of developing a 100 year plan to dominate the world. It wouldn't bother a typical Chinese leader for a second if he never sees the benefit of his lifes work in his lifetime.
> Americans on the other hand have zero patience. We actually have "negative" pateince, it doesn't bother a typical American leader for a second knowing he/she is hurting the future to solve an issue today.


----------



## Trajan

rdean said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Naw..you do just fine on your lonesome..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pwning you and your ilk?  Thanks, I know, it's why I have teh belt.  Step your game up and maybe you can earn your way off it one day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, millions of American jobs were moved to China.  A country of rice farmers living in rice paddies.  To build American factories costs billions and billions of dollars over years.  Where do you think that came from?  Don't be such a dumbass.  Think of my posts as "teaching moments".
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...or-gop-how-to-outsource-us-jobs-to-china.html
Click to expand...


please describe the corollary to the topic?


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

kiwiman127 said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is becoming a regional superpower in order to secure Taiwan. That is the main focus of everything they do. From Korea to building thier economic might they are building a foundation to run the USA out of southeast Asia in the next 20 years. After that maybe the world but for right now their main focus is getting back what they percieve is theirs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to stop them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
Click to expand...


......Seriously?

Use your damn head.  We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.

The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.

Now THINK....................................................


----------



## Sallow

Trajan said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pwning you and your ilk?  Thanks, I know, it's why I have teh belt.  Step your game up and maybe you can earn your way off it one day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, millions of American jobs were moved to China.  A country of rice farmers living in rice paddies.  To build American factories costs billions and billions of dollars over years.  Where do you think that came from?  Don't be such a dumbass.  Think of my posts as "teaching moments".
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...or-gop-how-to-outsource-us-jobs-to-china.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> please describe the corollary to the topic?
Click to expand...


The "corollary" is yet another reason to piss and moan about how republicans are shipping jobs to China.

Screw that it has zero to do with the topic.


----------



## Sallow

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to stop them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.
> 
> The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> Now THINK....................................................
Click to expand...




To funnah!


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

Sallow said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.
> 
> The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> Now THINK....................................................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To funnah!
Click to expand...


Your lack of an even semi-intelligent retort?  I do agree.

You might wanna put your lil thinkin cap on too............seriously.............


----------



## Intense

rdean said:


> What will Obama do?  What did Bush do?  It takes years to develop such technology.  Unless you just give it to them.
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, Republicans moved millions of jobs to China.  For those people to learn how to build hi tech, they needed someone to "teach" them first.  That cost money.
> 
> Bush created trillions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.  The right ALWAYS says the rich would use that money to create jobs.  Well, they were right.  Jobs WERE created.  IN CHINA!
> 
> And the right always think they know how to negotiate.  Isn't that hilarious?  Trillions to rich people and not a touch, not a trace of negotiation to make sure they spend it here.  Too damn hilarious.  Trillions in new debt to make jobs in China.  And they say they love this country.  Yet they are worse than our enemies.



You are so right RD! I bet Bush did it!!!      No Wait......


Bernard Schwartz, chief executive officer of Loral Space & Communications, tells The New York Times he considers President Clinton a friend, "but not the kind of friend that you can call upon for favors."
We're supposed to believe that Schwartz invested $1.3 million in Clinton's political campaigns without the expectation of special treatment. If that's true, you would expect Loral stockholders to demand an explanation for such reckless disregard of their interests. I doubt you'll see such a move. Because Loral got plenty of bang for its buck.

"I can say absolutely, categorically, I have never spoken with the president about any Loral business, except on one occasion," he says. Notice the careful wording of that statement. Never ... except on one occasion. Furthermore, it's clear Schwartz and his company did ask the president and his administration for favors -- for special treatment -- on more than one occasion.

Last February, Schwartz needed a quick decision from the government about the launching of a Loral satellite aboard a Chinese rocket later that month. Within two weeks the president gave Loral permission -- overruling the advice of his Justice Department, which was investigating Loral's satellite deals with China. Clinton also broke with past policy and the advice of his State Department and Pentagon.

When was the last time you got an answer -- any answer -- from the federal government in less than two weeks? This was a big favor -- a huge one. By working with the Chinese, instead of U.S. satellite launchers, the deal saved Loral potentially hundreds of millions of dollars.

Nevertheless, Schwartz maintains he never personally asked the president for anything that would benefit his company. These are lawyerly word games -- the kind America has become accustomed to since this administration came to power.

This was just the most recent favor. In 1994, Schwartz pushed hard for a seat on a trip to China led by Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. The trip paid off in spades for Loral. A meeting in Beijing with a top official led to Loral winning a deal to provide cellular telephone service to China, an agreement that will soon be worth $250 million annually.

Later, in May 1996, Schwartz wrote to Clinton urging him make the Commerce Department the clearing house for approval of export licensing of commercial satellites rather than the State Department. Once again, Schwartz got his way.

But still, we're supposed to believe that Clinton would have made the same decisions with the same timing had Schwartz not been the single biggest donor to the his political career. For Pete's sake, last year Clinton even threw Schwartz a birthday party at the White House.

None of this stuff is really new or particularly earth-shaking, however. Money has always been linked to political influence. No matter what kinds of campaign finance reforms America adopts, it simply seems to get worse. But the real horror, the real crime, the real treachery of the Clinton-Loral-China axis comes in the substance of the deals with China -- the dirty little details about technology transferred to China because of this political patronage.

This is a scandal unlike any other in American history. Clinton and Schwartz have nothing on Benedict Arnold. The sensitive technical data shared with the Chinese for simple greed and power has apparently enhanced the reliability of Beijing's long-range nuclear missiles -- missiles, by the way, targeted at the United States.

The Clinton-Loral-China axis


----------



## Sallow

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.
> 
> The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> Now THINK....................................................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To funnah!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your lack of an even semi-intelligent retort?  I do agree.
> 
> You might wanna put your lil thinkin cap on too............seriously.............
Click to expand...


If there were something intelligent to agree or disagree with..I might.

Nothing here.

Full disclosure, I was in Taipei over the summer.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

rdean said:


> What will Obama do?  What did Bush do?  It takes years to develop such technology.  Unless you just give it to them.
> 
> From 2001 to 2008, Republicans moved millions of jobs to China.  For those people to learn how to build hi tech, they needed someone to "teach" them first.  That cost money.
> 
> Bush created trillions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.  The right ALWAYS says the rich would use that money to create jobs.  Well, they were right.  Jobs WERE created.  IN CHINA!
> 
> And the right always think they know how to negotiate.  Isn't that hilarious?  Trillions to rich people and not a touch, not a trace of negotiation to make sure they spend it here.  Too damn hilarious.  Trillions in new debt to make jobs in China.  And they say they love this country.  Yet they are worse than our enemies.



Here's what its made from too!







Your boy Obama moved 500,000 jobs to China last year alone


----------



## kiwiman127

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to stop them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.
> 
> The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> Now THINK....................................................
Click to expand...


So, this thread has gone from new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers to defending Taiwan against China's obsession with Taiwan.  So you're suggesting a pre-emptive strike on China because they developed an anti-ship missile.  Correct?


----------



## MikeK

Sallow said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
Click to expand...

It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.

It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.  

We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.


----------



## Trajan

I thought it was a high- fly plunger...?


----------



## Sallow

MikeK said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
Click to expand...


While it's probably a problem..I am reasonably sure counter measures are being worked on as we speak.

And while the Russians make some pretty good gear..most of it pale in comparison to American made gear.


----------



## MikeK

iamwhatiseem said:


> Those of you that know me from other forums know that I have been saying this for years - China is the greatest threat to American power than the rest of the world put together.
> China has the patience of a saint. They would think nothing of developing a 100 year plan to dominate the world. It wouldn't bother a typical Chinese leader for a second if he never sees the benefit of his lifes work in his lifetime.
> Americans on the other hand have zero patience. We actually have "negative" pateince, it doesn't bother a typical American leader for a second knowing he/she is hurting the future to solve an issue today.


I agree completely.

The Chinese civilization has been around for *seven thousand years,* so they must know something.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

It's a concern, but you have to wonder what are carriers would be doing there in the first place and what our response would be to having one get hit by ChiCom hardware?

THe ChiComs tested Dubya in April 2001 by commandeering a research plane near Hainan Is., asked Dubya to apologize and then send the plane back it use in crates after the disassembled it.  OK. When the shooting started after 9/11 out very first bomb in the war leveled the ChiCom built teleco facility at Kabul.

When the ChiComs complained about the loss of life our response was somewhere between, "Did you thunk we we're kidding?" to "that's what happens when you get cute with us"

If we were at war with the ChiComs we would try to target and smoke as many launch sites and launchers as our Intel could track


----------



## Trajan

iamwhatiseem said:


> Those of you that know me from other forums know that I have been saying this for years - China is the greatest threat to American power than the rest of the world put together.
> China has the patience of a saint. They would think nothing of developing a 100 year plan to dominate the world. It wouldn't bother a typical Chinese leader for a second if he never sees the benefit of his lifes work in his lifetime.
> Americans on the other hand have zero patience. We actually have "negative" pateince, it doesn't bother a typical American leader for a second knowing he/she is hurting the future to solve an issue today.



its a mindset we have paid dearly ignoringI think Kipling wrote a few lines on that 
They sue a circular calender, we use a linear one, in their mindset time and events are cyclical in nature, we run ahead thinking we will run out if it.........


----------



## R.C. Christian

If the Chinese decided tomorrow to invade Taiwan, the U.S. would lose.


----------



## Sallow

Trajan said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those of you that know me from other forums know that I have been saying this for years - China is the greatest threat to American power than the rest of the world put together.
> China has the patience of a saint. They would think nothing of developing a 100 year plan to dominate the world. It wouldn't bother a typical Chinese leader for a second if he never sees the benefit of his lifes work in his lifetime.
> Americans on the other hand have zero patience. We actually have "negative" pateince, it doesn't bother a typical American leader for a second knowing he/she is hurting the future to solve an issue today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its a mindset we have paid dearly ignoringI think Kipling wrote a few lines on that
> They sue a circular calender, we use a linear one, in their mindset time and events are cyclical in nature, we run ahead thinking we will run out if it.........
Click to expand...


They also have no designs on the entire world. If anything..they would be much happier closing themselves to it.


----------



## Sallow

CrusaderFrank said:


> When the ChiComs complained about the loss of life our response was somewhere between, "Did you thunk we we're kidding?" to "that's what happens when you get cute with us"



I kinda doubt that. There were several British fighters shot down by Americans..as well as British military convoys strafed..by American units.

What was the message to them?

"British rock sucks"?

If anything..that whole episode was a superpower wink wink, nudge nudge. So the Russians could roll Georgia and the Chinese could roll Tibet.


----------



## ABikerSailor

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> What will Obama do? Likely NOTHING.  Perhaps negotiate a new Suicide Time Again Regression Treaty.......
> 
> 
> China's military is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers, a weapon that specialists say gives Beijing new power-projection capabilities that will affect U.S. support for its Pacific allies.
> 
> Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, disclosed to a Japanese newspaper on Sunday that the new anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is now in the early stages of deployment after having undergone extensive testing.
> 
> "An analogy using a Western term would be 'initial operational capability (IOC),' whereby I think China would perceive that it has an operational capability now, but they continue to develop it," Adm. Willard told the Asahi Shimbun. "I would gauge it as about the equivalent of a U.S. system that has achieved IOC."
> 
> China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says - Washington Times



Hey Righteous Lemming.........did you actually serve in the Fleet where they have stuff like CIWS, or did you get kicked out on an entry level separation because your stupid asthmatic ass couldn't keep up with the real men you went to boot camp with?

I'm guessing the latter.  BTW chump steak, if you'd actually been to the fleet, you'd understand that we've got several layers of protection around each and every carrier battle group.

Try again ya fucking retard.  You know NOTHING about the US Navy.


----------



## R.C. Christian

A must read. 

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/files/2008_RAND_Pacific_View_Air_Combat_Briefing.pdf


----------



## JakeStarkey

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> *snip *



If this is what you have on the president, my republican presidential candidate of the future's chances are slim.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Sallow said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> When the ChiComs complained about the loss of life our response was somewhere between, "Did you thunk we we're kidding?" to "that's what happens when you get cute with us"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I kinda doubt that. There were several British fighters shot down by Americans..as well as British military convoys strafed..by American units.
> 
> What was the message to them?
> 
> "British rock sucks"?
> 
> If anything..that whole episode was a superpower wink wink, nudge nudge. So the Russians could roll Georgia and the Chinese could roll Tibet.
Click to expand...


Did you miss the part about the first bomb of the Afghan Campaign hittign the ChiCom built and staffed Telco facility?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JakeStarkey said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *snip *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this is what you have on the president, my republican presidential candidate of the future's chances are slim.
Click to expand...


Why do you feel the need to highlight your candidate would be a "republican" Jake?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Why would you ask such a question, since you are not a Republican, CrusaderFrank.  I notice you ran like a scared skunk on the other thread.  Wise, son, very wife.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JakeStarkey said:


> Why would you ask such a question, since you are not a Republican, CrusaderFrank.  I notice you ran like a scared skunk on the other thread.  Wise, son, very wife.



What other thread?


----------



## R.C. Christian

Too bad an otherwise important thread has devolved to this mud sling.


----------



## uscitizen

Sallow said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
> 
> 
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> While it's probably a problem..I am reasonably sure counter measures are being worked on as we speak.
> 
> And while the Russians make some pretty good gear..most of it pale in comparison to American made gear.
Click to expand...


America is number1!
America is number1!


----------



## JWBooth

This story is at least 6 months old.


----------



## JWBooth

JWBooth said:


> This story is at least 6 months old.



Or more...

September - China needs carrier-killer missile: press | Missiles & Bombs News at DefenseTalk

August - Chinese &#39;Carrier-Killer&#39; Missile Could Reshape Sea Combat - FoxNews.com

April 2009 - New Concerns Over Chinese 'Carrier-Killer'


----------



## Sallow

CrusaderFrank said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> When the ChiComs complained about the loss of life our response was somewhere between, "Did you thunk we we're kidding?" to "that's what happens when you get cute with us"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I kinda doubt that. There were several British fighters shot down by Americans..as well as British military convoys strafed..by American units.
> 
> What was the message to them?
> 
> "British rock sucks"?
> 
> If anything..that whole episode was a superpower wink wink, nudge nudge. So the Russians could roll Georgia and the Chinese could roll Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you miss the part about the first bomb of the Afghan Campaign hittign the ChiCom built and staffed Telco facility?
Click to expand...


It very well might have been a real accident..

Like this:

BBC NEWS | UK | RAF Tornado downed by US missile


----------



## Sallow

uscitizen said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While it's probably a problem..I am reasonably sure counter measures are being worked on as we speak.
> 
> And while the Russians make some pretty good gear..most of it pale in comparison to American made gear.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> America is number1!
> America is number1!
Click to expand...


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

kiwiman127 said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.
> 
> The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> Now THINK....................................................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, this thread has gone from new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers to defending Taiwan against China's obsession with Taiwan.  So you're suggesting a pre-emptive strike on China because they developed an anti-ship missile.  Correct?
Click to expand...


Let's put the brakes on them words in my mouth dude, mmm k?

I never said that.  Your last post was insanely vague.  That being, anyone who's even remotely informed knows that Taiwan is @ the center of our usual diplomatic iciness with China.  Like I said, they've pledged to retake Taiwan, we've pledged to stop them.  IF they follow thru, they'll likely be a war, and that, yes, is ultimately the only way to stop China from what it really, obviously wants, Taiwan, Asia, the world.

But their new missle?  I know we can develop successful counter measures.  We've never met a weapon, system, etc. that we couldn't beat.......but Obama's mind boggling weakness is definitely impeding that.........


----------



## kiwiman127

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And *we have to stop them*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  *We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.*The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> *Now THINK*....................................................
Click to expand...


In my previous post I paraphrased what you had earlier posted. And isn't the main topic of this thread China's cruiser killer missile?  Based on your response, you seemed to tie China's new toy and Taiwan together.
Also, I asked you a question, that being (based on your above post) was your solution to this, a US unilateral attack China as in "we have to stop them".
Finally, please don't preach to me about being informed.  Even though folks tell me I'm well-read, I never hesitate in learnings new things every day.  While you're posting your 50 or so posts on these boards every day, I'm reading and learning.


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

kiwiman127 said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And your solution for stopping the Chinese?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ......Seriously?
> 
> Use your damn head.  *We have pledged to defend Taiwan against immoral, unwarranted, Chi-com military aggression.*The Chi-coms have pledged to retake Taiwan BY FORCE if it doesn't come back on it's own.
> 
> *Now THINK*....................................................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In my previous post I paraphrased what you had earlier posted. And isn't the main topic of this thread China's cruiser killer missile?  Based on your response, you seemed to tie China's new toy and Taiwan together.
> Also, I asked you a question, that being (based on your above post) was your solution to this, a US unilateral attack China as in "we have to stop them".
> Finally, please don't preach to me about being informed.  Even though folks tell me I'm well-read, I never hesitate in learnings new things every day.  While you're posting your 50 or so posts on these boards every day, I'm reading and learning.
Click to expand...


Been there, did that.  Appreciate your fanfare tho, as it's obvious you been on my page.  I addressed your claims in my last post.

You should quote that, and respond legitimately, instead of tryna nit pick that one.


----------



## uscitizen

ASo are we to go to war with a power that we could not whip twice before over a little island called Tiawan?

Of course they would enslave and torture the population of Taiwan just like they are doing to Hong Kong.

Could this be business interest driven?


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

uscitizen said:


> ASo are we to go to war with a power that we could not whip twice before over a little island called Tiawan?
> 
> Of course they would enslave and torture the population of Taiwan just like they are doing to Hong Kong.
> 
> Could this be business interest driven?



We have NEVER really been at real war with China.

You also just answered your own question of why we need to stop them with your 2nd sentence.


----------



## Intense

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ASo are we to go to war with a power that we could not whip twice before over a little island called Tiawan?
> 
> Of course they would enslave and torture the population of Taiwan just like they are doing to Hong Kong.
> 
> Could this be business interest driven?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have NEVER really been at real war with China.
> 
> You also just answered your own question of why we need to stop them with your 2nd sentence.
Click to expand...


We were at war with China during the Viet Nam Crisis and Korea. Our Military were just not allowed to reference it in their reports, at least in relation to Nam.


----------



## martybegan

MikeK said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
Click to expand...


I'm sure there is a countermeasure, the missile has been around for a while. and this is different then the balistic missile quoted in the OP's message.

these missiles can still be shot down by AA missiles, it is just harder to do it. There are also additonal countermeasures, such as shooting down the launching aircraft, sinking the launching boat, or even creating large water plumes in the flight path of the missile. 

Add in all the ECM/chaff/ etc countermeasures and the weapon is still a far cry from one shot one kill.


----------



## zzzz

We have fought the fought the Chinese numerous times throughout our history. Even on the mainland in the Battle of the Pearl River Forts, and during the boxer rebellion and occuppied parts of it!

A carrier task force has many levels of defense and against one of these missiles the odds are pretty good that it would be destroyed. The problem is when there are large salvos of missiles like 6or 10 at a time and the defensive systems become overloaded. It is during this time that a missile can get in a hit. And that is the dilemma what commanders face in combat. How much of a chance do they take. Since carriers project power through the air they can stand off to a certain range and stay out of harms way but because of that range the strike power and tactical flexibility is reduced. In a battle with the Chinese over Taiwan the carriers would stay on the eastern side of the island for the duration. Politically the US cannot lose a carrier so the commanders could not put a carrier in range of these missiles even with all the defense. So for the US this battle essentially becomes an air battle with naval aviation and air force. I have already posted about this scenerio in other threads and the corresponding study done on the air war.

This is but one aspect of the modernization of the Chinese military. They have ICBM's, very quiet subs that can be use to sink carriers too and other stuff we know nothing about. They still have to prove they can utilize these weapons in a war situation and this is why they are doing joint training exercises with foreign militaries. But for the US the question becomes *"Are we really going to lose all those men and material and absorb the cost of fighting for an island that is really a part of China and possibly lose that war?"* To me the answer is no. It is not worth it. How would the US have felt if Great Britian and France had stepped in and helped the confederate states with ships and troops? It is the same situation here. Tawain is a rebelious province of mainland China and it is not worth the lives of our men and women to keep it so.


----------



## martybegan

zzzz said:


> We have fought the fought the Chinese numerous times throughout our history. Even on the mainland in the Battle of the Pearl River Forts, and during the boxer rebellion and occuppied parts of it!
> 
> A carrier task force has many levels of defense and against one of these missiles the odds are pretty good that it would be destroyed. The problem is when there are large salvos of missiles like 6or 10 at a time and the defensive systems become overloaded. It is during this time that a missile can get in a hit. And that is the dilemma what commanders face in combat. How much of a chance do they take. Since carriers project power through the air they can stand off to a certain range and stay out of harms way but because of that range the strike power and tactical flexibility is reduced. In a battle with the Chinese over Taiwan the carriers would stay on the eastern side of the island for the duration. Politically the US cannot lose a carrier so the commanders could not put a carrier in range of these missiles even with all the defense. So for the US this battle essentially becomes an air battle with naval aviation and air force. I have already posted about this scenerio in other threads and the corresponding study done on the air war.
> 
> This is but one aspect of the modernization of the Chinese military. They have ICBM's, very quiet subs that can be use to sink carriers too and other stuff we know nothing about. They still have to prove they can utilize these weapons in a war situation and this is why they are doing joint training exercises with foreign militaries. But for the US the question becomes *"Are we really going to lose all those men and material and absorb the cost of fighting for an island that is really a part of China and possibly lose that war?"* To me the answer is no. It is not worth it. How would the US have felt if Great Britian and France had stepped in and helped the confederate states with ships and troops? It is the same situation here. Tawain is a rebelious province of mainland China and it is not worth the lives of our men and women to keep it so.



The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.  

Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.


----------



## zzzz

martybegan said:


> The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.
> 
> Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.



We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.


----------



## martybegan

zzzz said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.
> 
> Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.
Click to expand...


Words mean things, as someone once said. Also if we send Taiwan packing, what makes you think China will not try the same crap with South Korea or Japan?


----------



## Trajan

martybegan said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
> 
> 
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sure there is a countermeasure, the missile has been around for a while. and this is different then the balistic missile quoted in the OP's message.
> 
> these missiles can still be shot down by AA missiles, it is just harder to do it. There are also additonal countermeasures, such as shooting down the launching aircraft, sinking the launching boat, or even creating large water plumes in the flight path of the missile.
> 
> Add in all the ECM/chaff/ etc countermeasures and the weapon is still a far cry from one shot one kill.
Click to expand...


if it comes in like an Exocet which is not  what was described in the op as you noted, yes we have counter measures, we have point defenses etc. that have been upgraded since say, the Falklands. I would think we studied that and fly our CAP further out than 30 miles and use side scan and underneath the envelope radar etc. 

IF its a high flyer plunger, vectoring in a missile from 100K feet up, on to a surface moving at 30 knots,even at what appears to be a huge  1000 feet long and 200 feet wide is not as easy as it sounds. They'd need constant surveillance, interference free communications between the 'driver' all the way to the missile until it acquired the target, then of course we would attempt to jam its on-board homing devices. 

Its size as in carrying a payload that could "kill" a carrier is a virtue in that its purportedly a one shot one kill, but the size required to make it so, means less maneuverability especially when its goes 'terminal' on its final flight path etc.

In 2008, an Aegis launched SM-3 intercepted and 'killed ' a decaying U.S. satellite re-entering the atmosphere at over 20,000 mph. Apparently we aren't asleep.


----------



## zzzz

martybegan said:


> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.
> 
> Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Words mean things, as someone once said. Also if we send Taiwan packing, what makes you think China will not try the same crap with South Korea or Japan?
Click to expand...


Yes, giving someone your word person to person is one thing, governments though say one thing and do another. History is littered with examples of this including ours. The case for SK or Japan is we have a signed treaty with them and we have to respond if they are attacked. Taiwan is another story altogether.


----------



## Sallow

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ASo are we to go to war with a power that we could not whip twice before over a little island called Tiawan?
> 
> Of course they would enslave and torture the population of Taiwan just like they are doing to Hong Kong.
> 
> Could this be business interest driven?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have NEVER really been at real war with China.
> 
> You also just answered your own question of why we need to stop them with your 2nd sentence.
Click to expand...


Sure we have. You really need to pick up a freaking book. You could start with "The Boxer Rebellion" and end with "Korea".


----------



## Sallow

zzzz said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.
> 
> Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.
Click to expand...


You people are amazing. We maintain a military base on Taiwan.


----------



## Sallow

martybegan said:


> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.
> 
> Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Words mean things, as someone once said. Also if we send Taiwan packing, what makes you think China will not try the same crap with South Korea or Japan?
Click to expand...


Why? Because they really are not interested.

They did try to invade Vietnam after the US pulled out..but they got their asses roundly kicked by the Vietnamese.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> We were at war with China during the Viet Nam Crisis and Korea. Our Military were just not allowed to reference it in their reports, at least in relation to Nam.



I seriously doubt the Chinese sent troops to Vietnam. The two countries are hostile to each other..although they may have sent arms. Russians, however, are a different matter entirely.


----------



## zzzz

Trajan said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure there is a countermeasure, the missile has been around for a while. and this is different then the balistic missile quoted in the OP's message.
> 
> these missiles can still be shot down by AA missiles, it is just harder to do it. There are also additonal countermeasures, such as shooting down the launching aircraft, sinking the launching boat, or even creating large water plumes in the flight path of the missile.
> 
> Add in all the ECM/chaff/ etc countermeasures and the weapon is still a far cry from one shot one kill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if it comes in like an Exocet which is not  what was described in the op as you noted, yes we have counter measures, we have point defenses etc. that have been upgraded since say, the Falklands. I would think we studied that and fly our CAP further out than 30 miles and use side scan and underneath the envelope radar etc.
> 
> IF its a high flyer plunger, vectoring in a missile from 100K feet up, on to a surface moving at 30 knots,even at what appears to be a huge  1000 feet long and 200 feet wide is not as easy as it sounds. They'd need constant surveillance, interference free communications between the 'driver' all the way to the missile until it acquired the target, then of course we would attempt to jam its on-board homing devices.
> 
> Its size as in carrying a payload that could "kill" a carrier is a virtue in that its purportedly a one shot one kill, but the size required to make it so, means less maneuverability especially when its goes 'terminal' on its final flight path etc.
> 
> In 2008, an Aegis launched SM-3 intercepted and 'killed ' a decaying U.S. satellite re-entering the atmosphere at over 20,000 mph. Apparently we aren't asleep.
Click to expand...


The sunburn missile is a ship lauched missile not a land based system like the Dong Feng 21D (CSS-5) Medium-Range Ballistic Missile which is the missile in question. The sunburn was supplied to the Chinese navy along with 2 Destroyers with the launch systems.

Here is a picture of the 21D missile. It is a high trajectory ballistic missile not a cruise missile.







DongFeng 21D (CSS-5 Mod-4)



> The U.S. Department of Defense has confirmed the existence of the DF-21D land-based ASBM system, which is the worlds first and only of its kind. By combining manoeuvrable re-entry vehicles (MaRVs) with a terminal guidance system, the DF-21C is capable of targeting a slow-moving aircraft carrier battle group from a land-based mobile launcher. The maximum range of the missile was said to be 3,000km, possibly achieved by carrying a smaller payload.


 DongFeng 21 (CSS-5) Medium-Range Ballistic Missile - SinoDefence.com


----------



## zzzz

Sallow said:


> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The comparison with the civil war is not valid. To be the equivalent we would have had to step in in the first few years after the Nationalists left Mainland China and set up on Taiwan. This is now 50 years later, and basically they are two seperate countries, regardless of the current political shennanigans that go on.
> 
> Regardless of what people think, the US has pledged to protect Taiwan from any ChiCom incursion. For us to back out of this would ruin our ability to deal with other nations for decades to come.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You people are amazing. We maintain a military base on Taiwan.
Click to expand...


Where is it located? I do not know of any on the Island. We do not recognize Taiwan as an independant country, therefore we do not have diplomatic relations with them or an embassy so no Marines are there.


----------



## Trajan

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were at war with China during the Viet Nam Crisis and Korea. Our Military were just not allowed to reference it in their reports, at least in relation to Nam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt the Chinese sent troops to Vietnam. The two countries are hostile to each other..although they may have sent arms. Russians, however, are a different matter entirely.
Click to expand...


there were over 40K Chinese troops ( and north koreans)  in north Vietnam. they manned AA batteries, built roads, supervised building roads and bridges, drove trucks helped with logistics etc.


----------



## Sallow

zzzz said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do not have a pact with Taiwan to protect them, only words that we will. Reality is something different.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You people are amazing. We maintain a military base on Taiwan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where is it located? I do not know of any on the Island. We do not recognize Taiwan as an independant country, therefore we do not have diplomatic relations with them or an embassy so no Marines are there.
Click to expand...


We sure as heck DO have relations with them..and have for a long time. We DO recognize Taiwan as an independent country. For a long time we maintained a subtle pact to defend Taiwan until George W. Bush declared we would respond to any attack by China.

Ching Chuan Kang Air Base - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## zzzz

Sallow said:


> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> You people are amazing. We maintain a military base on Taiwan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where is it located? I do not know of any on the Island. We do not recognize Taiwan as an independant country, therefore we do not have diplomatic relations with them or an embassy so no Marines are there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We sure as heck DO have relations with them..and have for a long time. We DO recognize Taiwan as an independent country. For a long time we maintained a subtle pact to defend Taiwan until George W. Bush declared we would respond to any attack by China.
> 
> Ching Chuan Kang Air Base - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Read your own link


> On 13 November 1973, the 374th TAW was reassigned to Clark AB Philippines. In 1979, normalization of relations with the People's Republic of China (PRC) led to the withdrawal of USAF personnel from the base.


----------



## Sallow

zzzz said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zzzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where is it located? I do not know of any on the Island. We do not recognize Taiwan as an independant country, therefore we do not have diplomatic relations with them or an embassy so no Marines are there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We sure as heck DO have relations with them..and have for a long time. We DO recognize Taiwan as an independent country. For a long time we maintained a subtle pact to defend Taiwan until George W. Bush declared we would respond to any attack by China.
> 
> Ching Chuan Kang Air Base - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Read your own link
> 
> 
> 
> On 13 November 1973, the 374th TAW was reassigned to Clark AB Philippines. In 1979, normalization of relations with the People's Republic of China (PRC) led to the withdrawal of USAF personnel from the base.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


We still have a presence there.


----------



## uscitizen

Trajan said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's originally a Russian development.  The technology was sold to Iran, which in turn sold it to China.  It is a fearsome, ship-killing missile for which there is no available countermeasure.
> 
> It's called the _Sunburn_ and is not new but has been around for several years.  What makes it so dangerous is it flies faster than the speed of sound, carries an enormous payload (powerful enough to sink a carrier) and it follows a sensor-maintained flight path no higher than six feet above the surface of the water, which makes it undetectable by conventional radar.  And it costs less than a low-grade fighter plane to produce.
> 
> We'd better hope that a countermeasure for this weapon is developed soon, because it conceivably could render our Naval warfare capability totally useless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure there is a countermeasure, the missile has been around for a while. and this is different then the balistic missile quoted in the OP's message.
> 
> these missiles can still be shot down by AA missiles, it is just harder to do it. There are also additonal countermeasures, such as shooting down the launching aircraft, sinking the launching boat, or even creating large water plumes in the flight path of the missile.
> 
> Add in all the ECM/chaff/ etc countermeasures and the weapon is still a far cry from one shot one kill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if it comes in like an Exocet which is not  what was described in the op as you noted, yes we have counter measures, we have point defenses etc. that have been upgraded since say, the Falklands. I would think we studied that and fly our CAP further out than 30 miles and use side scan and underneath the envelope radar etc.
> 
> IF its a high flyer plunger, vectoring in a missile from 100K feet up, on to a surface moving at 30 knots,even at what appears to be a huge  1000 feet long and 200 feet wide is not as easy as it sounds. They'd need constant surveillance, interference free communications between the 'driver' all the way to the missile until it acquired the target, then of course we would attempt to jam its on-board homing devices.
> 
> Its size as in carrying a payload that could "kill" a carrier is a virtue in that its purportedly a one shot one kill, but the size required to make it so, means less maneuverability especially when its goes 'terminal' on its final flight path etc.
> 
> In 2008, an Aegis launched SM-3 intercepted and 'killed ' a decaying U.S. satellite re-entering the atmosphere at over 20,000 mph. Apparently we aren't asleep.
Click to expand...


A decaying satellite has a known predictable flight path.


----------



## Trajan

uscitizen said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure there is a countermeasure, the missile has been around for a while. and this is different then the balistic missile quoted in the OP's message.
> 
> these missiles can still be shot down by AA missiles, it is just harder to do it. There are also additonal countermeasures, such as shooting down the launching aircraft, sinking the launching boat, or even creating large water plumes in the flight path of the missile.
> 
> Add in all the ECM/chaff/ etc countermeasures and the weapon is still a far cry from one shot one kill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if it comes in like an Exocet which is not  what was described in the op as you noted, yes we have counter measures, we have point defenses etc. that have been upgraded since say, the Falklands. I would think we studied that and fly our CAP further out than 30 miles and use side scan and underneath the envelope radar etc.
> 
> IF its a high flyer plunger, vectoring in a missile from 100K feet up, on to a surface moving at 30 knots,even at what appears to be a huge  1000 feet long and 200 feet wide is not as easy as it sounds. They'd need constant surveillance, interference free communications between the 'driver' all the way to the missile until it acquired the target, then of course we would attempt to jam its on-board homing devices.
> 
> Its size as in carrying a payload that could "kill" a carrier is a virtue in that its purportedly a one shot one kill, but the size required to make it so, means less maneuverability especially when its goes 'terminal' on its final flight path etc.
> 
> In 2008, an Aegis launched SM-3 intercepted and 'killed ' a decaying U.S. satellite re-entering the atmosphere at over 20,000 mph. Apparently we aren't asleep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A decaying satellite has a known predictable flight path.
Click to expand...


I am aware.


----------



## uscitizen

I also remember the lies told to us by our government about the accuracy/effectiveness of the Patriot missles during the first gulf war.


----------



## Douger

Sallow said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
Click to expand...

You mean like the computer you posted that ignorant statement with ?


----------



## Sallow

uscitizen said:


> I also remember the lies told to us by our government about the accuracy/effectiveness of the Patriot missles during the first gulf war.





They never hit a thing.


----------



## Sallow

Douger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what China has ship killer missles.  perhaps we can buy some from them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they work as well as everything else China produces...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You mean like the computer you posted that ignorant statement with ?
Click to expand...


I have a 6 year old Alienware. Prior to Dell buying that company..it was Manufactured in the USA.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Trajan said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were at war with China during the Viet Nam Crisis and Korea. Our Military were just not allowed to reference it in their reports, at least in relation to Nam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt the Chinese sent troops to Vietnam. The two countries are hostile to each other..although they may have sent arms. Russians, however, are a different matter entirely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> there were over 40K Chinese troops ( and north koreans)  in north Vietnam. they manned AA batteries, built roads, supervised building roads and bridges, drove trucks helped with logistics etc.
Click to expand...


I happen to believe you are right, but please provide a credible link


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

Intense said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ASo are we to go to war with a power that we could not whip twice before over a little island called Tiawan?
> 
> Of course they would enslave and torture the population of Taiwan just like they are doing to Hong Kong.
> 
> Could this be business interest driven?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have NEVER really been at real war with China.
> 
> You also just answered your own question of why we need to stop them with your 2nd sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were at war with China during the Viet Nam Crisis and Korea. Our Military were just not allowed to reference it in their reports, at least in relation to Nam.
Click to expand...


Exactly, hence: NEVER, REALLY.


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

Sallow said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ASo are we to go to war with a power that we could not whip twice before over a little island called Tiawan?
> 
> Of course they would enslave and torture the population of Taiwan just like they are doing to Hong Kong.
> 
> Could this be business interest driven?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have NEVER really been at real war with China.
> 
> You also just answered your own question of why we need to stop them with your 2nd sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure we have. You really need to pick up a freaking book. You could start with "The Boxer Rebellion" and end with "Korea".
Click to expand...


*We're any of those official?  Korea sure as hell wasn't.  PROXY WARS DON'T COUNT YOU FLAMING DUMBASS.

Neither does a REBELLION.*


----------



## JakeStarkey

Tell that to the Marines and army personnel that faced 250,000 Chinese that came across the NK border in November 1950 and kicked our ass.  Tell that to my stepdad and his fellow heroes who fought their way from the reservoir in the middle of winter, taking their dead and wounded with them, to the coast for evacuation, having to fight every step of the way.  Tell that to Tenth Army and I Corps that reeled way back before they could stabilize the front lines.

What an amazing statement you just made.  R1, you have to evaluate the talking points your right wing masters are giving you.  You just look incredibly stupid here with official and unofficial statuses.  You need to think these things through.


----------



## Ancient lion

so, what ?!
Every one knows that China is growing rapidly - it knows how to use it's resources !


----------



## Sallow

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have NEVER really been at real war with China.
> 
> You also just answered your own question of why we need to stop them with your 2nd sentence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure we have. You really need to pick up a freaking book. You could start with "The Boxer Rebellion" and end with "Korea".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *We're any of those official?  Korea sure as hell wasn't.  PROXY WARS DON'T COUNT YOU FLAMING DUMBASS.
> 
> Neither does a REBELLION.*
Click to expand...


 Proxy wars don't count? That takes the cake. Neither does Rebellion? I am sure the Americans that fought in the Revolution would be happy to hear that if they were alive.

Any way..neither were "Proxy wars". Chinese rebels fought Americans in the Boxer Rebellion and China sent troops to Korea.


----------



## daveman

Wry Catcher said:


> Be scared.  Be very very scared.  And don't forget to hate the Chinese (they're not white people).
> We need more weapons, bigger nukes, more nukes, small nukes too.  Because they're out to get us.  The Russians too, and don't forget the Muslims, Arabs, North Koreans and Iranians.  Be scared.  Hate.  Remember, being scared and hating others will make you free.


If you had cast conservatives as the bad guys, I'd say you were reading an Obama Justice Department internal memo.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Proxy wars don't count?  Really?  Then what the fuck was Iraq?  If you ask all 4,000 plus soldiers and their families, I'm pretty sure they'd tell you different.

Ya know..........If Righteous Lemming had actually completed boot camp and gone into a specialty that actually deals with weapons threats (Operations Specialist, etc.) and completed a full enlistment, I'd be willing to listen to what they say.

Unfortunately, he's never even made it through boot camp, much less to the Fleet, and therefore, his views are suspect.


----------



## uscitizen

Didn't the Boxer Rebellion involve our support of the opium trade?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Nah, it supported European and Japanese imperialism against China's uprising against them at the turn of the century.  British opium markets and China's opposition happened about sixty years earlier.


----------



## Sallow

JakeStarkey said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt the Chinese sent troops to Vietnam. The two countries are hostile to each other..although they may have sent arms. Russians, however, are a different matter entirely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there were over 40K Chinese troops ( and north koreans)  in north Vietnam. they manned AA batteries, built roads, supervised building roads and bridges, drove trucks helped with logistics etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I happen to believe you are right, but please provide a credible link
Click to expand...


I never heard of it..I know there were ROK troops there..I had several friends in Vietnam.

However, Intense seems to be pretty credible..but it might be one of those "spooky" things.


----------



## JWBooth

uscitizen said:


> Didn't the Boxer Rebellion involve our support of the opium trade?



You're trying to coach folks whose depth of historical knowledge confuses WW1 with the death of Constantine.


----------



## Trajan

JakeStarkey said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt the Chinese sent troops to Vietnam. The two countries are hostile to each other..although they may have sent arms. Russians, however, are a different matter entirely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there were over 40K Chinese troops ( and north koreans)  in north Vietnam. they manned AA batteries, built roads, supervised building roads and bridges, drove trucks helped with logistics etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I happen to believe you are right, but please provide a credible link
Click to expand...


naaah, don't think so.


----------



## Sallow

JakeStarkey said:


> Nah, it supported European and Japanese imperialism against China's uprising against them at the turn of the century.  British opium markets and China's opposition happened about sixty years earlier.



Not to burst your bubble..but it sort of did.

Boxer Rebellion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Trajan

Sallow said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> there were over 40K Chinese troops ( and north koreans)  in north Vietnam. they manned AA batteries, built roads, supervised building roads and bridges, drove trucks helped with logistics etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I happen to believe you are right, but please provide a credible link
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never heard of it..I know there were ROK troops there..I had several friends in Vietnam.
> 
> However, Intense seems to be pretty credible..but it might be one of those "spooky" things.
Click to expand...


they were there,  and took causalities too, so did the nor kors, thousands were reported.  google the 67th PLA anti aircraft div. thats for you, Starkey's request is of no consequence.


----------



## (R)IGHTeous 1

Sallow said:


> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure we have. You really need to pick up a freaking book. You could start with "The Boxer Rebellion" and end with "Korea".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *We're any of those official?  Korea sure as hell wasn't.  PROXY WARS DON'T COUNT YOU FLAMING DUMBASS.
> 
> Neither does a REBELLION.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Proxy wars don't count? That takes the cake. Neither does Rebellion? I am sure the Americans that fought in the Revolution would be happy to hear that if they were alive.
> 
> Any way..neither were "Proxy wars". Chinese rebels fought Americans in the Boxer Rebellion and China sent troops to Korea.
Click to expand...


Facts are facts, THEY COUNT, and your technicality, smoke and mirrors BS doesn't.

*DID WE EVER DECLARE WAR ON CHINA DURING THAT BRIEF REBELLION?*

We also WEREN'T at war with China, but Korea, again, technically.  Why/how are you so ignorant?

I adhere to the Constitution on this subject, *war is ONLY war when OFFICIALLY DECLARED BY CONGRESS.*

*That seems obsolete now, but it shouldn't be.  The WOT is the WOT for obvious lack of a better term, but again, factually, NOT REALLY, according to again, THE CONSTITUTION.*

Give it up Sallow, I shant be granting you a chance a redemption by debate with me anew, I know that, after the utter x3 pwning you got in the Iraq thread (he doesn't even know what IRANIANS REALLY ARE), that you very much want it, but nein.

I got bigger fish to fry, but by all means, keep inviting Starkey and other spazing spammers here in an amusing attempt to back you up.


----------



## Sallow

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (R)IGHTeous 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *We're any of those official?  Korea sure as hell wasn't.  PROXY WARS DON'T COUNT YOU FLAMING DUMBASS.
> 
> Neither does a REBELLION.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Proxy wars don't count? That takes the cake. Neither does Rebellion? I am sure the Americans that fought in the Revolution would be happy to hear that if they were alive.
> 
> Any way..neither were "Proxy wars". Chinese rebels fought Americans in the Boxer Rebellion and China sent troops to Korea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Facts are facts, THEY COUNT, and your technicality, smoke and mirrors BS doesn't.
> 
> *DID WE EVER DECLARE WAR ON CHINA DURING THAT BRIEF REBELLION?*
> 
> We also WEREN'T at war with China, but Korea, again, technically.  Why/how are you so ignorant?
> 
> I adhere to the Constitution on this subject, *war is ONLY war when OFFICIALLY DECLARED BY CONGRESS.*
> 
> *That seems obsolete now, but it shouldn't be.  The WOT is the WOT for obvious lack of a better term, but again, factually, NOT REALLY, according to again, THE CONSTITUTION.*
> 
> Give it up Sallow, I shant be granting you a chance a redemption by debate with me anew, I know that, after the utter x3 pwning you got in the Iraq thread (he doesn't even know what IRANIANS REALLY ARE), that you very much want it, but nein.
> 
> I got bigger fish to fry, but by all means, keep inviting Starkey and other spazing spammers here in an amusing attempt to back you up.
Click to expand...


Watch you post in circles is sort of fun..sad..but fun.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sallow said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, it supported European and Japanese imperialism against China's uprising against them at the turn of the century.  British opium markets and China's opposition happened about sixty years earlier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to burst your bubble..but it sort of did.
> 
> Boxer Rebellion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


From your link "The uprising took place in response to European "spheres of influence" in China, with grievances ranging from opium traders, political invasion, economic manipulation, to missionary evangelism.[6]"  I did not realize that the opium grievances had continued for so long.

Learn something every day.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Trajan said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I happen to believe you are right, but please provide a credible link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never heard of it..I know there were ROK troops there..I had several friends in Vietnam.
> 
> However, Intense seems to be pretty credible..but it might be one of those "spooky" things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they were there,  and took causalities too, so did the nor kors, thousands were reported.  google the 67th PLA anti aircraft div. thats for you, Starkey's request is of no consequence.
Click to expand...


Thank you for your compliance, Trajan.   I knew you would provide it because you could not afford looking any more stupid.


----------



## JakeStarkey

(R)IGHTeous 1 said:


> I adhere to the Constitution on this subject, *war is ONLY war when OFFICIALLY DECLARED BY CONGRESS.*



You are such a little fish and too small to fry.  You are wrong.  A force authorization acts as a declaration for constitutional purposes.  You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but an internet shittenpuppy's opinion like yours is of no real importance.  You know that.  Run along.


----------

