Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by Smitty-48 » Mon Dec 26, 2016 3:41 pm

The real Bolshevist threat to America now, is Canchurian not Manchurian; the liberal media and their hyperventilating hysteria to a tyrannical big government public sector unionized dictatorship.

If you're feeling the need to shoot some Pseudo-Commies, don't bother with the Chinese, just shoot the Lefties right in your midst.

Your true enemy is not Xi Jinping, it's Chairman Meow.
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
ssu
Posts: 2142
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by ssu » Mon Dec 26, 2016 3:57 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:Meh, more Red Scare hysteria from our resident Finnish Pogue, the Chinese are a Paper Tiger symmetrically and assymetrically as well, "assymetrical" is just a fancy euphemism for "losers".
Well Smitty, at least the PACOM commander when talking to the Senate (last November?) did exactly talk about the threat of the DF-21 missiles
to the carriers
.
“I think China’s… surface-to-air missiles, on Woody Island; its radars, new radars on Cuarteron Reef over here; the runway, the 10,000-foot runway… on Fiery Cross Reef and other places; these are actions that are changing, in my opinion, the operational landscape in the South China Sea,” Harris told the senators. “The DF-21 (ballistic missile), which they have, and the DF-26, which they are developing, could pose a threat to our carriers. I think, though, our carriers are resilient and we have the capability to do what has to be done”.

To protect the aircraft carriers and maintain stability in the region despite Chinese aggression in the South China Sea, Harris said he needs more submarines, more long-range weapons, and more intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR).

“I asked for increased surface-to-surface weapons,” he said of his budget talks with the Navy and Pentagon.

“When I started flying P-3s back in the late 70s we had the Harpoon missile, and that’s the same missile we have today. And we need to have increased lethality and reach and speed that I talked about before, and I’m grateful that the service has responded to that request and in the FY17 budget there are increased funding for programs to increase lethality for surface-to-surface missiles.”
USNI news, from early this year:
Harris: PACOM Needs More Subs, Long-Range Missiles To Counter Chinese Threats

More views from the commander...unfortunately cut extremely badly by AP.


Furthermore, here's from the actual written testimony that the PACOM comander gave then to the senate armed services committee:
China’s strategic capabilities are significant. The JIN-class ballistic missile submarine (Type 094) carries the JL-2 submarine launched ballistic missile capable of reaching parts of the continental U.S. and represents China’s first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent. New roadmobile intercontinental ballistic missiles provide more strike options and greater survivability.
In the maritime domain, China’s Navy (PLA(N)) is increasing its routine operations in the Indian Ocean, expanding the area and duration of operations and exercises in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, and is beginning to act as a global navy - venturing into other areas, including Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and the Middle East.

While China has not clearly defined the scope of its maritime claims in the South China Sea, China has unilaterally changed the status quo. Chinese leaders seem to believe that, through coercion, intimidation, and force, they can bypass accepted methods of dispute resolution. They have demonstrated this through aggressive artificial island building, and by growing a fleet of “white hull” ships and fishing vessels whose purpose is to dominate the area without the appearance of overt military force. China is now turning its artificial island projects into operating bases for forward-staging military capabilities - under the rubric of being civilian facilities. For example in January 2016, China landed civilian aircraft on its man-made airbase at Fiery Cross Reef. The PLA is installing new or improved radars, communications systems, and other military capabilities at seven separate reclaimed bases. The scale and scope of these projects are inconsistent with the China’s stated purpose of supporting fishermen, commercial shipping, and search and rescue. Although Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Taiwan have also conducted land reclamation in the South China Sea, their total - approximately 115 acres over 45 years - is dwarfed by the size, scope, speed, and scale of China’s massive buildup.
See document here

Oh sure, "asymmetrical" is for the weaker, but might not be the loser. Especially when the idea is simply to make it too costly for the US to intervene in a territorial disputes between China and a third country.

As for asymmetric warfare, perhaps best investment the Chinese could do to improve their position is to finance the next hotels or golf resorts Ivanka will be building. Perhaps then Trump will start to tweet favourably about China and diss some Japan and Phillipines as being too scared of China's intentions. Now that's the how you this asymmetric war.

User avatar
ssu
Posts: 2142
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by ssu » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:00 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:The real Bolshevist threat to America now, is Canchurian not Manchurian; the liberal media and their hyperventilating hysteria to a tyrannical big government public sector unionized dictatorship.

If you're feeling the need to shoot some Pseudo-Commies, don't bother with the Chinese, just shoot the Lefties right in your midst.

Your true enemy is not Xi Jinping, it's Chairman Meow.
There's an ample amount of threads whining about the liberals here.

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by Smitty-48 » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:01 pm

So America loses an aircraft carrier, so what? America sinks the entire Chinese navy as a result, Chinese government collapses internally in the face of a self inflicted catastrophic defeat, Big Red White and Blue Machine cranks out ten more aircraft carriers and just rolls on without them.
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
ssu
Posts: 2142
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by ssu » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:04 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:All y'all need to know about "Cold War Thinking", is that all pronouncements of "America's Doom!" by way of "Ten Foot Tall Communists!" armed with "Nigh Incvincible Wunderwaffen!" are of course breathlessly exagerrated to the point of absurdity, who knew?

Who is the "Cold War Thinker" here? Yeah, that would Finnish "Red Scare" Pogue; ssu.
Seems like your the Wunderwaffen believer with the F-35.

And do notice it's kybkh saying that there will be sooner or later a war with China. I'm not saying that. What I'm referring to is the military and foreign policy developments in the region that any military commander or political leader has to think about.

You just start with a "Red Scare" strawman.

User avatar
kybkh
Posts: 2826
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:33 am

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by kybkh » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:06 pm

The only added defense they add is by forcing the US totime salvos so 1st wave of stealth cruise missiles don't strike those islands before main land targets.
“I've got a phone that allows me to convene Americans from every walk of life, nonprofits, businesses, the private sector, universities to try to bring more and more Americans together around what I think is a unifying theme..." - Obama

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by Smitty-48 » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:08 pm

ssu wrote:Seems like your the Wunderwaffen believer with the F-35.
That's because the Americans build the real Wunderwaffen and the Russians and Chinese don't, F-35 is a game changer, Sino-Russo Potemkin Weapons ain't.
Last edited by Smitty-48 on Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
Fife
Posts: 15157
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by Fife » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:08 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:The real Bolshevist threat to America now, is Canchurian not Manchurian; the liberal media and their hyperventilating hysteria to a tyrannical big government public sector unionized dictatorship.

If you're feeling the need to shoot some Pseudo-Commies, don't bother with the Chinese, just shoot the Lefties right in your midst.

Your true enemy is not Xi Jinping, it's Chairman Meow.
Just sayin',

who's doing the cleaning up around here?


:chores-mop:

User avatar
kybkh
Posts: 2826
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:33 am

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by kybkh » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:10 pm

Yeah, but everyone knows I am crazy.

I say it's the likeliest conflict we'd be involved in for a couple reasons...

1. We could win.
2. China stability is depends on controlling over a billion people.
3. Nothing would MAGA faster than the elimination of a billion workers.
“I've got a phone that allows me to convene Americans from every walk of life, nonprofits, businesses, the private sector, universities to try to bring more and more Americans together around what I think is a unifying theme..." - Obama

User avatar
ssu
Posts: 2142
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

Post by ssu » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:11 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:So America loses an aircraft carrier, so what? America sinks the entire Chinese navy as a result, Chinese government collapses internally in the face of a self inflicted catastrophic defeat, Big Red White and Blue Machine cranks out ten more aircraft carriers and just rolls on without them.
Yet, if the whole issue is a bunch of stupid rocky islets in the middle of nowhere? If there's a risk that those aircraft carriers might be at risk. If the carrier having those super-duper awesome F-35s might be at risk.

That's my point.

It's basically again the "No WW3 because of Latvia" argument. Some dipshit Islands in the South or East China sea are even less of a reason to attack China with nuclear weapons.

Let's just remember that Argentina attacked a nuclear armed country and occupied it's territory. Did it think the Brit's would nuke Buenos Aires? Nope. Not a chance. Hence the British nuclear deterrence didn't keep a country from attacking it. They (the Brits) didn't start sinking Argentinian commercial shipping or bombing mainland Argentina. One has to understand that if there is a limited conflict, then likely both parties will keep try to keep it limited.
Last edited by ssu on Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.