China's SCS Strategy Thread

[Blackstone]

Interesting and positive development indeed. I guess Trump was testing the water with China all this time to find their "line in the sand". Now that he has, the actual negotiation/juggling begins...

That's probably spot on, but the other side of the coin is not to induce too much ill will for the eventual meeting of minds.

 

[Blackstone]

now I read China upgrades military infrastructure on South China Sea islands, report claims

source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So what? The Parcels haven't been a point of contention between Washington and Beijing, and neither side has much incentives to make it so, neocons notwithstanding.

 

[Equation]

Your arguments are ridiculous. The debate started with you claiming Trump is a racist and when confronted with reasons to the contrary, you then said his Cabinet picks are and I quote "full of white guys thinking like him," and you went on to say Trump couldn't find "a more than qualify minority to be a member of his cabinet and administrations?" You over stated your case in each of the three quotes.

There are plenty of fact-based issues to criticize Trump, and Americans far and wide have done just that, so there's no reason to make false ones.

It is full of white guys and gals thinking like him, even the minority ones are "white washed". I don't know where did you get the idea it is otherwise. My underlying point is that the cabinets are all part of the "good ole boys running the show like back in the ole days" type of people. Now as far as Trump getting criticized by the public and media (both liberal and conservative) that is his fault and no one else.

 

[Equation]

Typical bully boy behaviour. Give him an inch and he will want a mile, but stand up to him and he may show you respect.

Although with Trump, his message and tone changes as rapidly as his moods, so it's wise not to read too much into this.

Wait to judge him on his actions, not words.

True but his behavior are becoming easily predictable, therefore easy to counter his moves. He's basically on operation saving face 24/7/365 by either tweeting or screaming at the cameras.

 

[Jura The idiot]

it's probably nothing, but I think it shows it's getting "crowded" there, so I post
U.S., Chinese aircraft in 'unsafe' encounter in South China Sea

The U.S. Pacific Command detailed what it called an "unsafe" close encounter between a U.S. Navy P-3 Orion aircraft and a Chinese aircraft Wednesday.

The two planes reportedly flew within 1,000 feet of each other in the general vicinity of the contested Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea.

Maj. Rob Shulford, a spokesman for PACOM, told Defense News that “on Feb. 8 (local), an interaction characterized by U.S. Pacific Command as 'unsafe' occurred in international airspace above the South China Sea between a Chinese KJ-200 aircraft and a U.S. Navy P-3C aircraft.”

He also said that "the U.S. Navy P-3C was on a routine mission operating in accordance with international law," adding that “The Department of Defense and U.S. Pacific Command are always concerned about unsafe interactions with Chinese military forces."

There have been no other details about the relative flight paths of both aircraft at the time of the encounter, which has been described as “inadvertent,” although other reports said that the American P-3 had to alter course to avoid an aerial collision.

The Chinese aircraft involved has been identified as a Shaanxi KJ-200 Airborne Early Warning (AEW) aircraft, which suggests that this was unlikely to be an intercept of the P-3 by the Chinese.

The KJ-200 carries a phased array radar inside a long rectangular housing mounted on struts on top of its fuselage, and is used by both the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and the air arm of People’s Liberation Army Navy to provide air surveillance.

It is unclear which branch of China’s armed forces the aircraft involved in this latest encounter came from, although PLAN KJ-200s have been noted operating from air bases on China’s southern Hainan Island, 530 miles from Scarborough Shoal.

The aircraft are usually on temporary rotations to Hainan, being normally assigned to the PLAN’s 2nd Air Division, 4th Regiment based at Laiyang in Shandong Province, northern China.

source is DefenseNews

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[PanAsian]

The latest score card from Rand a much improve China's offense and defense capability

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

An Interactive Look at the U.S.-China Military Scorecard

While that's a detailed analysis it still comes from the US perspective of a worst case scenario, and China threat propaganda, by being generous about China's capabilities and underestimating US capabilities.

Most importantly these posts don't belong in "The Best Defence is a Good Offence (China in the Americas)" thread, which is an extremely unrealistic idea to begin with, so I am replying where these posts more closely match the topic.

LOL 490 pages dude and i check if you read all this great stuff haha
Actualy reading that goodness and checking number ofc i have see some errors hehe

BTW i don' t think possible have a fair neutral conversation instructive here... damage but !

BTW I disagree with the pessimism of your BTW though there seems to be increased fanboism around.

 

[FORBIN]

While that's a detailed analysis it still comes from the US perspective of a worst case scenario, and China threat propaganda, by being generous about China's capabilities and underestimating US capabilities.

Most importantly these posts don't belong in "The Best Defence is a Good Offence (China in the Americas)" thread, which is an extremely unrealistic idea to begin with, so I am replying where these posts more closely match the topic.



BTW I disagree with the pessimism of your BTW though there seems to be increased fanboism around.

Agree this title ! and yes the fanboism is present !

 

[Blackstone]

While that's a detailed analysis it still comes from the US perspective of a worst case scenario, and China threat propaganda, by being generous about China's capabilities and underestimating US capabilities.

I endorse this.

 

[FORBIN]

Most importantly these posts don't belong in "The Best Defence is a Good Offence (China in the Americas)" thread, which is an extremely unrealistic idea to begin with, so I am replying where these posts more closely match the topic.

U.S.A - China Balance of Power
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/u-s-a-china-balance-of-power.t8106/

 

[Hendrik_2000]

While that's a detailed analysis it still comes from the US perspective of a worst case scenario, and China threat propaganda, by being generous about China's capabilities and underestimating US capabilities.

Most importantly these posts don't belong in "The Best Defence is a Good Offence (China in the Americas)" thread, which is an extremely unrealistic idea to begin with, so I am replying where these posts more closely match the topic.

BTW I disagree with the pessimism of your BTW though there seems to be increased fanboism around.

I don't think that is necessary true. Why because it doesn't fit with your preconception that US has overwhelming superiority against China?

RAND is very prestigious think tank and they have involve in planning and study of every war that US undertake, It is non profit organization and staffed by higly qualified researches and not journalist

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Supported by who is who is US industry like GE,Wealthy foundation, US government contract. NO vestiges interest here
Their report goes to the highest echelon in the US official,government
If you read carefully they change their assessment over the year and that clearly reflect the fact on the ground. If anything they underestimate China nuclear asset No mention of DF41. No mention of underground great wall.Their estimate of the warhead is on the low side doesn't include warhead stock pile . Even their estimate of Modern fighter is on the low side No mention of J 20 that is now entering service

The frequently contrast their assessment in 2005, 2010, 2015. They clearly said that in 1998 US will only need 2 regiment to wipe out all of China airforce and in 2015 it grew to 2000 fighters or more
I know it is hard to get rid of decades of brainwashing
But too bad that is the fact There is no Fanboism here I don't add anything here It is their assessment and their conclusion
Take it or leave it
Of course you can spin it which way you want

Perpetuating RAND's Tradition of High-Quality Research and Analysis
For more than 60 years, the name RAND has been synonymous with high-quality, objective research and analysis on issues at the top of the national and international policy agendas. We at the RAND Corporation are proud of that reputation, of the many studies—now tens of thousands—that have contributed to it, and of the researchers and specialists who built and sustain it. We are also proud of the ways by which we ensure that our research products and services reflect our core values of quality and objectivity.

Although internal discussions about research quality have always been an integral part of RAND culture, more than a decade ago, we decided to codify in writing the quality standards for all RAND research. We intend the written standards to serve both as a guide for those who conduct, manage, support, and evaluate the research activities at RAND and also as the set of principles by which our research units and programs shape their individual quality assurance processes.