075 LHD thread

Intrepid said:

... and they are a good base for mine warfare.

Click to expand...

Is mine warfare really a valid area for the PLAN?

AFAIK they’re very good at counter mine warfare, but at using mines themselves? Aren't mines mainly suitable for small navies who lack the means to use other ways to fight?

Ambushing ships would mainly be the role for SSKs, LHDs would act as force amplifiers that keep enemy submarines away and let them focus on anti surface mission. And with 30 helicopters on board, it will further increase countermine warfare as well.

asif iqbal said:

Kindly stop trolling

You have picked up a bad habit

You are talking rubbish as usual

Click to expand...

I think you need to calm down. You presented your statement in your earlier post which he might not agree, but he didn't call you names or accusing you of anything. He simply disagreed and presented his own view. You may not agree with him or even slightly convinced by him, but why pick on him? Has he done anything wrong by presenting his view that's different from yours according to the rules of this forum?

Anyway, of cause PLANS amphibious force is partly trained to deal with TW if and when amphibious landing is required. I'm not saying it's all for TW, but partly nevertheless.

Because he is a fan boy who believes anything he is told by any stupid Chinese article he posts

You can not verify every single aspect by here say

I am a realistic and yes I get carried away I am guilty of that also but throwing around bombastic statements by some Chinese fan boys having wet dreams over silly posts is unacceptable

LHD is a blue water warship for over the horizon operations especially if it has a well deck, you are either stupid or naive to think otherwise

It’s like saying CV-16 is a training ship when it’s clearly armed with weapons for war pure and simple

And I simply don’t have time for trolls to explain myself

asif iqbal said:

Because he is a fan boy who believes anything he is told by any stupid Chinese article he posts

You can not verify every single aspect by here say

I am a realistic and yes I get carried away I am guilty of that also but throwing around bombastic statements by some Chinese fan boys having wet dreams over silly posts is unacceptable

LHD is a blue water warship for over the horizon operations especially if it has a well deck, you are either stupid or naive to think otherwise

It’s like saying CV-16 is a training ship when it’s clearly armed with weapons for war pure and simple

And I simply don’t have time for trolls to explain myself

Click to expand...

They are going to use their LHD in any way as they wish, depending on their security situation. But in the short term, using them nearer is more likely than using them farther away.

As for the CV-16, probably there are contractual issues that limits its usage.

t2contra said:

How? Care to give examples?

Click to expand...

Sigh, remember the Vietnamese protest back in the 2000s that targeted businesses and enterprises of Chinese origins ? Or the Balochistan attacks on Chinese investments ? Or the more recent Malaysian elections of which Chinese investments and influence were a very charged topic ? It really easy to check actually ? Instead of just asking "why" or "how" in a indigant and spoon fed fashion

Viktor Jav said:

Sigh, remember the Vietnamese protest back in the 2000s that targeted businesses and enterprises of Chinese origins ? Or the Balochistan attacks on Chinese investments ? Or the more recent Malaysian elections of which Chinese investments and influence were a very charged topic ? It really easy to check actually ? Instead of just asking "why" or "how" in a indigant and spoon fed fashion

Click to expand...

Grow up. This is a forum and everyone has the right to ask another to clarify. If you find explaining is spoon feeding, this forum may not be for you.

Of the examples you posted, how were the workers and businesses running afoul of local politics and tensions? If it was the politics, then it helps if you clarified because the way you put it, it sounded that the Chinese business people were breaking local laws. Other than that, I don't see them doing any actions that instigated those responses.

Also, there were no attempt by the Chinese government to evacuate its citizens. Sigh.

asif iqbal said:

Because he is a fan boy who believes anything he is told by any stupid Chinese article he posts

You can not verify every single aspect by here say

I am a realistic and yes I get carried away I am guilty of that also but throwing around bombastic statements by some Chinese fan boys having wet dreams over silly posts is unacceptable

LHD is a blue water warship for over the horizon operations especially if it has a well deck, you are either stupid or naive to think otherwise

It’s like saying CV-16 is a training ship when it’s clearly armed with weapons for war pure and simple

And I simply don’t have time for trolls to explain myself

Click to expand...

Well, you are entitled to your view, I'm not going to disagree with that. But, I still believe everyone here has the freedom to express their own view whether they are based on Chinese sources, European sources or American sources as long as they are politely present their views without hurting anyone who's different views from them.

It's in my view PLAN would use their future LHDs whatever way they like. And TW is definitely one place they are prepared to use. Of cause, they might also deploy them to other places of interests when necessary. We (at least I) can't presume the way PLAN might use their LHDs simply based on the US or any other Western European navies.

As for CV16, I don't think it's right to drag a carrier related topic into this. But in short, I don't see any problem when PLAN called it a training ship after it entered service couple of years ago as it was indeed to train any future PLAN carrier personnels. In the west maybe that isn't the terminology navies would use. But, why would PLAN care what other navie think about name calling? And what's more, PLAN did confirm CV16 is fully operational now. Since then, the so called training ship terminology hasn't been used once. That's why I personally don't have a problem with the training ship name.

t2contra said:

Grow up. This is a forum and everyone has the right to ask another to clarify. If you find explaining is spoon feeding, this forum may not be for you.

Of the examples you posted, how were the workers and businesses running afoul of local politics and tensions? If it was the politics, then it helps if you clarified because the way you put it, it sounded that the Chinese business people were breaking local laws. Other than that, I don't see them doing any actions that instigated those responses.

Also, there were no attempt by the Chinese government to evacuate its citizens. Sigh.

Click to expand...

Oh please. There is asking with first doing some basic research or at least bring their own opinions up to the table, and then there is mouthing out questions and expecting the other side to fill in the basic blanks for you. Yours falls squarely into the latter rather than the former.
Grow up ? Had you even try to comprehend what I said before hand ? I dare you to recheck my post to find even a hint of legal talk or hints in it. All laws find their source in politics yes, but not all politics end up being laws, learn that fact. Ever heard of racial and economic tensions ? Talk of foreigners taking over businesses and leaving the locals out to dry ? That is the sort of talk that is permeating the world in the back lash of globalism, no matter how the governments may try to sugar coat it, no one really relish the idea of a whole bunch of people of a totally different culture and race setting up shop right across the street. Chinese businesses and people can be doing everything legal in a foreign country and they will still incur negative perception simply by being there and themselves.
Your appalling lack of knowledge regarding cultural interactions and international news betrays the incredible lack of depth and broad-mindedness you posses. That you choose to immediately interpret (or twist to be more correct) my words into the most unlogical and unreasonable meaning possible only serves as icing on the cake. My words could not have been more concise and clear, it is you who choose to be so ignorant of their meaning.

And contrary to what you claimed, China had already being tentative steps of non-military intervention in other countries. China evacuated its citizens from Libya and Yemen when civil war broke out.

P.S: I do not mind people asking me questions, I just mind people who response can be aptly be summed up as "Oh Yeah ? Prove it then buster. I have a differing opinion on what you say but I am just going to expect you to build my case for me."

Viktor Jav said:

Oh please. There is asking with first doing some basic research or at least bring their own opinions up to the table, and then there is mouthing out questions and expecting the other side to fill in the basic blanks for you. Yours falls squarely into the latter rather than the former.
Grow up ? Had you even try to comprehend what I said before hand ? I dare you to recheck my post to find even a hint of legal talk or hints in it. All laws find their source in politics yes, but not all politics end up being laws, learn that fact. Ever heard of racial and economic tensions ? Talk of foreigners taking over businesses and leaving the locals out to dry ? That is the sort of talk that is permeating the world in the back lash of globalism, no matter how the governments may try to sugar coat it, no one really relish the idea of a whole bunch of people of a totally different culture and race setting up shop right across the street. Chinese businesses and people can be doing everything legal in a foreign country and they will still incur negative perception simply by being there and themselves.
Your appalling lack of knowledge regarding cultural interactions and international news betrays the incredible lack of depth and broad-mindedness you posses. That you choose to immediately interpret (or twist to be more correct) my words into the most unlogical and unreasonable meaning possible only serves as icing on the cake.

Click to expand...

Don't bring in irrelevant stuff.

Since you are so knowledgeable, show me articles of Chinese companies that abuse other countries' laws that led to riots against Chinese business requiring evacuation of the Chinese people en masse wherein something like a Type 075 would come in handy.

You posted the following examples:

Sigh, remember the Vietnamese protest back in the 2000s that targeted businesses and enterprises of Chinese origins ? Or the Balochistan attacks on Chinese investments ? Or the more recent Malaysian elections of which Chinese investments and influence were a very charged topic ?

Click to expand...

Especially the last one. Goodness.

If you had given the examples of disaster relief in, say the Philippines, or evacuation of war refugees, I would have liked your post.

t2contra said:

Don't bring in irrelevant stuff.

Since you are so knowledgeable, show me articles of Chinese companies that abuse other countries' laws that led to riots against Chinese business requiring evacuation of the Chinese people en masse wherein something like a Type 075 would come in handy.

You posted the following examples:

Click to expand...

How about you stop twisting my original posts and with the loaded questions first ? You response already predispose that you will only accept facts that confers with your belief (that the said Chinese entities must be actively doing an illegal act to fit in your description). My position from the start was this clear and simple:

That Chinese involvement and actions with the world at large will inevitably incur negative perceptions in other countries by certain local factions and groups or they might find themselves in a violent conflict by simple fact of sheer bad luck and third party circumstances. These actions need not be illegal or even morally wrong to be perceived as negative (hence the wordings "local politics and tensions") they just need to put Chinese business and people in the limelight and center of the action, in such situations amphibious assault ships are amply suited to conduct non-military actions or evacuations due to their design and nature if such negative perceptions crosses the threshold into physical or even violent acts.

That is it nothing more and nothing less. Unless you based your response on this simple understanding, you bring absolutely nothing relevant even worthwhile to the table because you are basically prattling about in your own echo chamber. The only real irrelevancy here is you.

t2contra said:

Especially the last one. Goodness.

If you had given the examples of disaster relief in, say the Philippines, or evacuation of war refugees, I would have liked your post.

Click to expand...

Oh gee and I did expect to be grateful or even elated by that act ? The shallowness of perceiving a "like" as a acknowledgement of fact lol.

Get one thing straight there, I do not post to garner likes or acknowledgment from you and your ilk around here. I post because I have my own opinions on a said matter and I like to make it known and/or to seek other reasonable inputs or discussions it. Even if there was a "dislike" button and you lot spammed the hell out it would not ruffle even the least of my feathers. Rather it would only amuse me to see how many people are so easily triggered.