Like Tree51Likes

China's 6 Wars in the next 50 Years

Reply
Page 10 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
  1. #91

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    23,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Watercooler:
    With the greatest respect, you also have no idea what you are talking about if you think a country will always understand what another country does. There is a failure of communication by the Japanese.
    Communication is a two way process. If you think there are no diplomatic links between Japan and China, and that this issue was not discussed in detail before, during and after than you are completely naive. Everyone (except, it seems you!) knew what was going on at the time..

    For you to unilaterally place the blame in one half really demonstrates you don't understand how both sides are using this to their own political ends - remember both countries were undergoing a major change of Government at the time and a bit of national fervour always plays well in domestic politics.

  2. #92
    ouwen

    Details, details, details....... did anyone step back and look at the big picture?

    In early 2010, the US defence agreements (US govt clearance to sell certain types of weapons) for South Korea, Japan and Taiwan were due to expire. The three countries were allowing the contracts to expire, because they had no fear of China. They were, in fact, doing more business with China than with the US.

    Three weeks before contract expiration, the South Korean war ship Cheonan was cut in two by a underwater explosion. North Korea was blamed. North Korea angrily denied involvement and threatened military retaliation if punished.

    Speculation flys about whether it was a N. Korean torpedo, or an old mine. Of course no one would dare mention a Limpet mine for fear of being called a "conspiracy theorist". Limpet mines have been effective clandestine ship killers for nearly a century, and 41 very concerned nations gathered in the Arabian Gulf for International Mine Countermeasures Exercise 13, but that couldn't be applicable here. No way...

    The three contracts were renewed, with very expensive land joint exercises tacked on, as well as joint naval exercises in the East China sea. This irritated China (as intended) and put the fear on North Korea. North Korea does the war dance of rocket testing, so that the US can sell anti missile systems to Japan and S. Korea. Thank you North Korea, but sorry, no commission.

    Now Japan, how about those island disputes. We have these weapons that would be perfect for such a situation. The Phillipines just ordered them and they are extremely pleased. Only 450 million each......... We can noise up the island dispute situation a little to justify the expense to the voting public.

    And the band plays on......... nothing ever changes..... except the PR.


  3. #93

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040

    None of this matters. The US has quietly been developing the biggest "game changer" since nuclear weapons and it has China very worried. While China is trying to put men on the moon and build aircraft carriers, the US is developing technology that will render all other weapons as useless.

    Air breathing engines!!!

    hypersonic propulsion system technologies that have defense potential well beyond aircraft. Missiles, high-speed weapons and advanced defense systems could all be enhanced by this sort of tech.

    This next stage hypersonic speed could be very useful for time-critical missions, and give the U.S. unprecedented speed in global strikes. Imagine missiles hitting targets across the planet in mere minutes?

    This missile has tested out at hypersonic speeds above Mach 5!!!!!

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3_RrFXQ...%3D3_RrFXQViyo

    Last edited by closedcasket; 05-12-2013 at 10:59 AM.

  4. #94

    Is this the same as HOTOL the British were playing with back in the early 80s?


  5. #95
    ouwen
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoSteve:
    Is this the same as HOTOL the British were playing with back in the early 80s?
    HOTOL was/is a rocket that partially uses atmospheric oxygen instead of liquid oxygen.

    Scramjet is a technology from the 1950's but it is impractical since the scram jet engine must be accelerated to the final speed by another means of propulsion, such as the rocket used in the video.

    If a scram jet takes over propulsion when it is moving 500 miles an hour, it will never go any faster than 500 miles an hour. If you could get it moving at 18.000 miles at hour before firing it up, it will keep going 18,000 miles an hour.

    The scram jet theory is fantastic, but putting it to practical use is far into the future.
    Last edited by ouwen; 05-12-2013 at 11:40 AM.
    GeoSteve likes this.

  6. #96
    ouwen

    But I'm speaking from a geek point of view. The US military does things that are impractical. I guess that's because killing people is not supposed to be practical. Just a fun and profitable power trip.

    A missile could be fired with very little fuel, and let the scram jet take over at normal rocket speed. The missile could fly very far on little fuel (burning mostly air). It would perform much like a low flying cruise missile, but with much greater range.

    It couldn't fly high, because there would not be enough air.

    What military advantage that provides, I don't know. Maybe CC can explain it.

    Last edited by ouwen; 05-12-2013 at 11:53 AM.

  7. #97

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by ouwen:
    But I'm speaking from a geek point of view. The US military does things that are impractical. I guess that's because killing people is not supposed to be practical. Just a fun and profitable power trip.

    A missile could be fired with very little fuel, and let the scram jet take over at normal rocket speed. The missile could fly very far on little fuel (burning mostly air). It would perform much like a low flying cruise missile, but with much greater range.

    It couldn't fly high, because there would not be enough air.

    What military advantage that provides, I don't know. Maybe CC can explain it.
    Really? You need me to explain what advantage it would be to have a missile that can go speeds exceeding Mach 5??
    (About 3,800 mph)
    How about complete annihilation of targets before the enemy has time to even think of responding??

    The future of conventional warfare is speed and stealth...not power. I don't know why the Chinese are building aircraft carriers. Aircraft carriers are sitting ducks...
    Last edited by closedcasket; 05-12-2013 at 03:31 PM.

  8. #98

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,112
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBrit:
    Communication is a two way process. If you think there are no diplomatic links between Japan and China, and that this issue was not discussed in detail before, during and after than you are completely naive. Everyone (except, it seems you!) knew what was going on at the time..

    For you to unilaterally place the blame in one half really demonstrates you don't understand how both sides are using this to their own political ends - remember both countries were undergoing a major change of Government at the time and a bit of national fervour always plays well in domestic politics.
    See, this is what I am talking about when you don't understand international relations at all. Please avoid inflammatory accusations like who is "naive" if your comprehension of international relations is insufficient.

    When did I say there is no communication? It's no that there is no communication, but the signal wasn't receive in the way the sender intended. It does not matter whether Japan tells China their nationalization was meant to lower temperature if the Chinese don't believe it. Actions speaks louder than words. Have you ever thought that the Chinese warned the Japanese not to do it in back channels (after being told of the Japanese intentions) but the Japanese went ahead anyway? The fact of the matter is that there is a change in status quo that is unacceptable to China, period.

    And who is unilaterally blaming one side? Seems like you have difficulty with reading my posts. Did I say China was right to have this ADIZ? I am simply stating why, from the Chinese perspective, they felt justified to carrying out their actions. It doesn't mean they actually are justified to do so.
    Last edited by Watercooler; 05-12-2013 at 05:19 PM.

  9. #99

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Watercooler:
    See, this is what I am talking about when you don't understand international relations at all. Please avoid inflammatory accusations like who is "naive" if your comprehension of international relations is insufficient.

    When did I say there is no communication? It's no that there is no communication, but the signal wasn't receive in the way the sender intended. It does not matter whether Japan tells China their nationalization was meant to lower temperature if the Chinese don't believe it. Actions speaks louder than words. Have you ever thought that the Chinese warned the Japanese not to do it in back channels (after being told of the Japanese intentions) but the Japanese went ahead anyway? The fact of the matter is that there is a change in status quo that is unacceptable to China, period.

    And who is unilaterally blaming one side? Seems like you have difficulty with reading my posts. Did I say China was right to have this ADIZ? I am simply stating why, from the Chinese perspective, they felt justified to carrying out their actions. It doesn't mean they actually are justified to do so.

    Yes, China is trying to stir the pot. Nothing new. China has territorial disputes with all nations it shares a border with + 8 other ones.

    It's kind of like in school when one kid is constantly getting into fights...there comes a point when it is obvious who is causing the trouble.






  10. #100

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Location Location
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by closedcasket:
    None of this matters. The US has quietly been developing the biggest "game changer" since nuclear weapons and it has China very worried. While China is trying to put men on the moon and build aircraft carriers, the US is developing technology that will render all other weapons as useless.

    Air breathing engines!!!
    Huh? Doctor No had FIRE breathing tanks way back in 1962.

    I doubt that having engines that blow air would concern the Chinese unless they wanted their hair dried.
    Last edited by greenmark; 05-12-2013 at 08:56 PM.

Reply
Page 10 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast