There was a time that US had the economic/financial capacity to overawe nearly all countries in the World and no country came near. The technological developments were impressively fast. The Saturn project was a prime example and the F-22, although a little slow, still counts. Despite neglecting maintenance and development of its infrastructure US cannot match what China did in SCS while China also builds its high speed railways at the same time.
China's SCS Strategy Thread
- Thread starter lilzz
- Start date
Given the low cost of CIWS versus expensive missiles, it makes sense to invest in CIWS.
Yes, the neocons successfully sold President Bush, Congress and the US people a lie about Saddam's WMD.
And I've said before, China is the world's largest trading nation with most of that trade passing through the SCS. And that SCS trade is all mixed up with everyone else's in Asia, given how China sits at the centre of the Asian trade network.
So why would China ever want to shut down trade in the SCS?
It is the USA that is more likely to try and shut down trade in the SCS.
Just had a thought about the mobile nuclear reactors China has announced for the SCS.
If the Chinese bases in the SCS are attacked, then it is Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei that will mostly suffer from the nuclear contamination, not China.
So would these SCS countries support the US in such an endeavour?
If the Chinese bases in the SCS are attacked, then it is Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei that will mostly suffer from the nuclear contamination, not China.
So would these SCS countries support the US in such an endeavour?
What China spends on infrastructure a year is greater than the combined total of those by the US and Europe annually. While it is quite impressive to launch or commission nuclear-powered carriers and SSBN's and other capital armament every few years or every year, China has been starting construction of anywhere from half-dozen to over a dozen high-speed railway lines each costing equivalent of a nuclear-powered super-carrier each year in the last decade, to use as an example. Different priorities I suppose. Some argue that the US has largely completed its major infrastructure construction, but they're getting dated and need regular maintenance and continuous improvements. China, on the other hand, is getting state-of-the-art infrastructure and technologies; this phase of national build-out will probably reach its peak between 2025-2030. From then on, the national investment priority will likely to change and China can better afford to spend more on defense, if necessary.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
China to Vietnam stop those drilling or else. Well the BBC is disappointed that Vietnam comply
South China Sea: Vietnam halts drilling after 'China threats'
By Bill HaytonBBC News
Image copyrightAFP
Image captionVietnam and other neighbours contest China's territorial claims in the area
Vietnam has reportedly terminated a gas-drilling expedition in a disputed area of the South China Sea, following strong threats from China.
A source in the south-east Asian oil industry has told the BBC that the company behind the drilling, Repsol of Spain, was ordered to leave the area.
It comes only days after it had confirmed the existence of a major gas field.
Those reports have been corroborated by a Vietnamese diplomatic source.
According to the industry source, Repsol executives were told last week by the government in Hanoi that China had threatened to attack Vietnamese bases in the Spratly Islands if did not stop.
China claims almost all of the South China Sea, including reefs and islands also contested by other nations.
The drilling expedition began last month in an area of sea about 400km (250 miles) off Vietnam's south-east coast.
The Vietnamese call the region Block 136-03 and have leased it to a company called Talisman-Vietnam, a subsidiary of Repsol.
China calls it Wanan Bei-21 and has leased the same piece of seabed to a different company.
Exactly which company is not clear. In 2015, the Chinese rights were sold to a Hong Kong-listed company called Brightoil, but it has recently denied owning them.
Two of the directors of Brightoil are senior members of the Chinese Communist Party.
Image copyrightAFP
Image captionThe two countries had a tense stand-off in 2014 when China drilled for oil in disputed waters
Talisman-Vietnam was formerly owned by the Canadian company Talisman, but since 2015 has been part of the Spanish-owned Repsol group.
One analyst, who did not want to be named, estimated that Repsol has spent about $300m on developing the field so far.
It has therefore come as a surprise to observers that Vietnam should have backed down so quickly.
In 2014 coastguard vessels and other ships belonging to China and Vietnam confronted each other in a different area of the South China Sea, further north, near the Paracel Islands.
Since then the two countries have tried to avoid confrontation.
Related Topics
South China Sea: Vietnam halts drilling after 'China threats'
By Bill HaytonBBC News
Image captionVietnam and other neighbours contest China's territorial claims in the area
Vietnam has reportedly terminated a gas-drilling expedition in a disputed area of the South China Sea, following strong threats from China.
A source in the south-east Asian oil industry has told the BBC that the company behind the drilling, Repsol of Spain, was ordered to leave the area.
It comes only days after it had confirmed the existence of a major gas field.
Those reports have been corroborated by a Vietnamese diplomatic source.
According to the industry source, Repsol executives were told last week by the government in Hanoi that China had threatened to attack Vietnamese bases in the Spratly Islands if did not stop.
China claims almost all of the South China Sea, including reefs and islands also contested by other nations.
The drilling expedition began last month in an area of sea about 400km (250 miles) off Vietnam's south-east coast.
The Vietnamese call the region Block 136-03 and have leased it to a company called Talisman-Vietnam, a subsidiary of Repsol.
China calls it Wanan Bei-21 and has leased the same piece of seabed to a different company.
Exactly which company is not clear. In 2015, the Chinese rights were sold to a Hong Kong-listed company called Brightoil, but it has recently denied owning them.
Two of the directors of Brightoil are senior members of the Chinese Communist Party.
Image captionThe two countries had a tense stand-off in 2014 when China drilled for oil in disputed waters
Talisman-Vietnam was formerly owned by the Canadian company Talisman, but since 2015 has been part of the Spanish-owned Repsol group.
One analyst, who did not want to be named, estimated that Repsol has spent about $300m on developing the field so far.
It has therefore come as a surprise to observers that Vietnam should have backed down so quickly.
In 2014 coastguard vessels and other ships belonging to China and Vietnam confronted each other in a different area of the South China Sea, further north, near the Paracel Islands.
Since then the two countries have tried to avoid confrontation.
Related Topics
Wow, what was Vietnam expecting anyway? They give a disputed territory to a private company (profit driven) from another nation who have no beef in this fight in this battle, and tell them go ahead drill???
And of course at first sign of threat the company withdraw and leave Vietnam hanging, did Vietnam expect them to stick up to China? If so, why would they do that? Was Vietnamese Navy providing protection? Even if they did, no private company will justify this risk.
That is why when China do it, they use their own company to drill and they are not afraid to back down in a situation like this..
And of course at first sign of threat the company withdraw and leave Vietnam hanging, did Vietnam expect them to stick up to China? If so, why would they do that? Was Vietnamese Navy providing protection? Even if they did, no private company will justify this risk.
That is why when China do it, they use their own company to drill and they are not afraid to back down in a situation like this..
As I've posted in this forum a while back China's SCS islands are dwarfed by US military installations in Okinawa, Diego Garcia, and Guam, which are more equivalent and relevant comparisons. Or the totality of US military installations on Oahu in Hawaii rather than just a part of it such as Pearl Harbor.
