If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   U.S. Bases in the Pacific vulnerable to a bolt-from-the-blue military attack. This is not a repeat from 71 years ago   (globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 146
    More: Scary, U.S. Naval War College, forward operating base, People's Liberation Army, aircraft carriers, P L A, USS George Washington, Imperial Japan, combat operations  
•       •       •

9309 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Dec 2012 at 12:30 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



146 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-07 01:38:03 PM
"The Han Chicoms" would be a great name for a Chinese boy band.
 
2012-12-07 01:38:05 PM

Nick Nostril:

2) The runways at Midway Island have bushes growing out of them, FFS. Someone get some landscapers out there, stat!


They still have one active runway at Midway, every once in a while a commercial airliner has to land for some mechanical issue. Now all of the albatrosses nesting on the field are a whole other issue, but that's why Midway was turned over to Fish and Wildlife by the Navy back in the '90s.

Wake OTOH, has an active 3000m runway that the AF Navy and Marines will still use when they're moving planes from one place to the other. Somehow I doubt they'd hold off an invasion force for 2 weeks like they did back in WWII though.

/Have been to Wake, have worked with the Midway folks
 
2012-12-07 01:40:21 PM

Mad_Radhu: It's kind of hard to mount a sneak attack against someone that has radar...


img845.imageshack.us 
 
2012-12-07 01:44:25 PM

bubo_sibiricus: What motives? Really, what motives? What possible non-crazy motive would China have to attack us or our allies in Asia and the Pacific?


Same motive Japan had.

Oil.

But, then again, it's not like any nation has started a war over oil in recent history, right? What set us off on Iraq was not Bush Jr. trying to please his daddy or the neo-cons being confused about who attacked us on 9/11 - it was a response to the UN giving the greenlight to Iraq to cut oil contracts with France and China.

The way we keep the Chicom hive mind at bay is by controlling the oil. They are looking for a way out of that situation. They are building offensive force projection systems and getting quite bellicose with their neighbors over the island chains that hold oil.

There will be war.
 
2012-12-07 01:44:26 PM
How did it work out for the Germans when they bombed Pearl Harbor?
 
2012-12-07 01:46:03 PM

H31N0US: Had we the nuclear capabilities of today in 1945, Japan would have never looked eastward for expansion.

I don't think China is that dumb.


They arent. Besides, why attack the people who are paying you so much in interest? Never mind the fact that we outgun them in every aspect, including nuclear. They are far better of bleeding us dry cash and trade wise.



Mad_Radhu: It's kind of hard to mount a sneak attack against someone that has radar and satellite surveillance.

Also, am I missing something, or does the Chinese "stealth" just seem to not actually have any actual stealth features? It generally apes the shape of the F-22/F-35, but it seems like it is missing a lot of the details that actually make a plane low observable.

[img.news.sina.com image 550x367]

For example, the cockpit has a frame that is flat in the front, while the F-22 and F-35 both have canopy frame that are faceted where they meet the body of the jet to reduce radar returns. 

[sitelife.aviationweek.com image 440x330]

You also have those big round engine nozzles, instead of the F-22 style nozzles. From everything I've read about the subject, attention to those small details matters almost as much in determining what the RCS is going to be of a stealth aircraft than the final shape of the aircraft. There is also advanced materials like carbon fiber and radar absorbing paint that also factors into the equation, so I have a gut feeling that the J-31 actually has a pretty large RCS compared to the American stealths. It honestly might not even be that lower than a traditional aircraft, and if I had to guess I'd think that it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of an F-15 Silent Eagle or an F-18 Super Hornet, which adds some stealthy features on to a traditional airframe.


yup, pretty much spot on. Not a shabby plane in any way, but not nearly the equal of the one it copies.
 
2012-12-07 01:46:49 PM

Diogenes Teufelsdrockh: Mad_Radhu: It's kind of hard to mount a sneak attack against someone that has radar...

[img845.imageshack.us image 320x258]


LOL

Well, has radar and is trained to use it. And knows to tell someone. And that someone they told knows what the hell it means.
 
2012-12-07 01:49:24 PM

Mad_Radhu: It's kind of hard to mount a sneak attack against someone that has radar and satellite surveillance.


Hard, but not impossible. I can think of some options. Sub launched cruise missile attack to soften up defenses, followed by an invasion with troops and equipment concealed on a container ship (nobody would think twice about a container ship coming from China!). Take the airport by a commercial flight filled with special operations troops at roughly the same time as the missile attack. Maybe land some troops via submarine at strategic points. You might even infiltrate the population gradually, if you were patient enough.

The PRC is nothing if not patient, btw. They set up a translation service in Hawaii, using American citizens of Chinese descent, and waited until they could bid upon and receive contracts to translate PRC radio signals that the US intercepted. This is a big deal, because the among the best intelligence you can get is signals intelligence. As I recall, it took 10 years from the time they set up the company to when it was awarded contracts.
 
2012-12-07 01:49:30 PM

Sultan Of Herf: H31N0US: Had we the nuclear capabilities of today in 1945, Japan would have never looked eastward for expansion.

I don't think China is that dumb.

They arent. Besides, why attack the people who are paying you so much in interest? Never mind the fact that we outgun them in every aspect, including nuclear. They are far better of bleeding us dry cash and trade wise.



Because they understand the end-game. Which is where we use their dependency upon oil that we control to put the screws to them. No nation lives in another's shadow for any longer than they have to.
 
2012-12-07 01:51:32 PM

dittybopper: H31N0US: Had we the nuclear capabilities of today in 1945, Japan would have never looked eastward for expansion.

I don't think China is that dumb.

That depends. The PRC has some serious structural, erm, challenges that they are going to have deal with. Things like the majority of their commercial loans being worthless, tens of millions of marriage age men without corresponding women (due to the "One Child" policy and selective abortions). So far, they've been able to keep those problems at bay by growing at double digit rates, but that can't last forever. When their economy crashes, as it must at some point, they are going to have a major problem with internal unrest. When that happens, they may look to an outside enemy to focus the attention of the people away from their empty bellies and empty beds.

That is the scenario


If only there were a quick solution to having too many men. One that has been used throughout history. If only...
 
2012-12-07 01:52:04 PM

SweetHomeNowhere: ChipNASA: Farkers: China, China, China....

Reality:

WHAT ABOUT BEST KOREA?!?!??!?!

/that's no shiat.

Best Korea isn't the biggest concern right now. South Korea will have a hardliner nationalist as a president and she (yes, a daughter of a Communist dictator who allied with the USA) will most likely disturb China, Japan, and North Korea simultaneously. Japan will likely have an anti-American ultra-nationalist party in power sooner or later.

We always think that North Korea is a problem in Asia without questioning. I think we need to change our approach.

Besides, North Korea's existence helps selling weapons to Japan and South Korea. The Western world definitely needs to keep North Korea as a valuable secret ally to keep selling weapons.



Park Chung-hee was a right-wing authoritarian/fascist.
 
2012-12-07 01:52:47 PM

sid244: [www.enchantedlearning.com image 244x160] + [www.enchantedlearning.com image 443x288] + [1.bp.blogspot.com image 400x226]

VS

[www.mapsofworld.com image 390x265] + [www.enchantedlearning.com image 432x300] + [flagspot.net image 420x221]

Who ya got?


It's more like China vs. Vietnam, the Phillipines, India, and Japan.

The United States? Well, we just sit in the corner and watch for a while, get good and worked up, then jump in at the end to spray all over everything.
 
2012-12-07 01:55:39 PM

Apik0r0s: Same motive Japan had.

Oil.


Good god, you're a moron.

The American oil embargo caused a crisis in Japan. Reliant on the US for 80% of its oil, the Japanese were forced to decide between withdrawaling from China, negotiating an end to the conflict, or going to war to obtain the needed resources elsewhere.

We do not have a farking embargo against China like we had against Japan. It's not even a remote possibility.

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were just trolling, but you truly believe your bullshiat. It's not even entertaining.

And with that, say goodbye.  Plonk.
 
2012-12-07 01:57:21 PM

dittybopper: Hard, but not impossible. I can think of some options. Sub launched cruise missile attack to soften up defenses, followed by an invasion with troops and equipment concealed on a container ship (nobody would think twice about a container ship coming from China!). Take the airport by a commercial flight filled with special operations troops at roughly the same time as the missile attack. Maybe land some troops via submarine at strategic points. You might even infiltrate the population gradually, if you were patient enough.


I don't think launching an invasion cross hundreds or thousands of miles of ocean via the modern equivalent of the trojan horse is going to work particularly well, and modern giant cargo ships make particularly poor amphibious landing vessels. The real problem, though, is logistics. Both land and air transports are big and slow, and you can't run a modern military living off the land.
 
2012-12-07 01:58:46 PM

Apik0r0s: If only there were a quick solution to having too many men. One that has been used throughout history. If only...


pic2.qguide.com
 
2012-12-07 01:58:50 PM

Non-evil Monkey: Perhaps, but I don't think China would go for the US, at least not right away.


Oh, no, they'd avoid direct conflict with us. At least until we boycotted their products. We're their single biggest customer.
 
2012-12-07 01:59:10 PM

bubo_sibiricus: Apik0r0s: Same motive Japan had.

Oil.

Good god, you're a moron.

The American oil embargo caused a crisis in Japan. Reliant on the US for 80% of its oil, the Japanese were forced to decide between withdrawaling from China, negotiating an end to the conflict, or going to war to obtain the needed resources elsewhere.

We do not have a farking embargo against China like we had against Japan. It's not even a remote possibility.

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were just trolling, but you truly believe your bullshiat. It's not even entertaining.

And with that, say goodbye.  Plonk.



There was no embargo against Japan in July of 1941.
 
2012-12-07 01:59:28 PM

Apik0r0s: If only there were a quick solution to having too many men. One that has been used throughout history. If only...


*THAT* is what scares me.
 
2012-12-07 02:04:00 PM

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: How did it work out for the Germans when they bombed Pearl Harbor?


The's get the reference right...

Bluto: Hey! What's all this laying around stuff? Why are you all still laying around here for?
Stork: What the hell are we supposed to do, ya moron? We're all expelled. There's nothing to fight for anymore.
D-Day: [to Bluto] Let it go. War's over, man. Wormer dropped the big one.
Bluto: What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Otter: [to Boon] Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.
 
2012-12-07 02:05:17 PM

Diogenes Teufelsdrockh: Mad_Radhu: It's kind of hard to mount a sneak attack against someone that has radar...

[img845.imageshack.us image 320x258]


C'ome on Lou turn that thing off and lets grab some grub, no one will know.
 
2012-12-07 02:09:33 PM

wxboy: This just in: Surprise attacks against stationary targets are often successful. The trick is achieving surprise.


The real trick is withstanding the retaliation.
 
2012-12-07 02:12:44 PM
According to Jessie Jackson:

Barak Obama should be proud to be the "Defense Spending President". Defense Spending, feed the chidren. Defense Spending, create jobs. Defense Spending, keep the family safe. Defense Spending, create new technologies.
 
2012-12-07 02:13:18 PM
There was no embargo against Japan in July of 1941.

That's precisely when it started.
 
2012-12-07 02:15:47 PM

you have pee hands: dittybopper: Hard, but not impossible. I can think of some options. Sub launched cruise missile attack to soften up defenses, followed by an invasion with troops and equipment concealed on a container ship (nobody would think twice about a container ship coming from China!). Take the airport by a commercial flight filled with special operations troops at roughly the same time as the missile attack. Maybe land some troops via submarine at strategic points. You might even infiltrate the population gradually, if you were patient enough.

I don't think launching an invasion cross hundreds or thousands of miles of ocean via the modern equivalent of the trojan horse is going to work particularly well, and modern giant cargo ships make particularly poor amphibious landing vessels. The real problem, though, is logistics. Both land and air transports are big and slow, and you can't run a modern military living off the land.


All you have to do is get there. Once you've got control of relatively small areas (the airport, the dock facilities), you can bring in a lot more stuff, and you can do it relatively quickly by air, and by sea for the heavier stuff.

Also, you can pre-position a lot of supplies on ships. Like I said, no one would think twice about seeing a container ship from China. Or two. Or three. The stuff doesn't have to be in containers, btw: You can build a false structure that looks like containers, but contains things like helicopters.

Not easy, but not impossible.
 
2012-12-07 02:17:05 PM

Diogenes Teufelsdrockh: Mad_Radhu: It's kind of hard to mount a sneak attack against someone that has radar...

[img845.imageshack.us image 320x258]


We are slight better at interpreting radar signals now than we were in 1941.
 
2012-12-07 02:18:18 PM

maudibjr: First consider the means. The Chinese military can now lock their crosshairs on Japan, home to the largest U.S. naval and air bases in the world.

Naval Station Norfolk is the worlds largest naval base.


That's what I thought.
W00t! W00t! Represent!
 
2012-12-07 02:22:18 PM

signaljammer: There was no embargo against Japan in July of 1941.

That's precisely when it started.


I thought it was August. My point was that while we may not have an embargo against China right now, it could happen quickly, just as quickly as the war that would follow. I can see us ending up at odds with China when they start bullying their way onto others islands in the region and there being embargoes, blockades or other sanctions.
 
2012-12-07 02:25:27 PM
China was probably out of ideas until they read this article.

Nice job CNN.

2.bp.blogspot.com

Way to ruin peace in the world.
 
2012-12-07 02:30:24 PM

dittybopper: All you have to do is get there. Once you've got control of relatively small areas (the airport, the dock facilities), you can bring in a lot more stuff, and you can do it relatively quickly by air, and by sea for the heavier stuff.


You also need to control a means of access to said airport and dock facilities. I think resupply by sea is totally out of the question. Sweeping the entire shipping route of nuclear submarines would be next to impossible and cargo ships would be pretty vulnerable to long ranged anti-ship missiles as well. (FWIW, I don't think the US could do it either - the subs are too quiet, dive too deep, and move too fast. There just hasn't been a hot war between powers with submarines since they were all diesel/electric). At least air transports don't require weeks to cross the ocean but they're still subsonic and tremendously vulnerable to SAMs and AAMs. You might be able to get land some troops and equipment on those initial cargo ships, but unless they can immediately turn that into total regional naval and air superiority it'd be a suicide mission.
 
2012-12-07 02:30:45 PM
Sorry, CNN. America is not vulnerable to attack from someone we owe two trillion dollars to. That is 20 times their annual defense budget.
 
2012-12-07 02:31:47 PM

signaljammer: There was no embargo against Japan in July of 1941.

That's precisely when it started.


Well that and all our aid to the KMT, who Japan was at war with. We'd been supporting Chiang Kai-shek to varying degrees for a long time. Declaring war on us, France and the UK in theory gave Japan a chance to cut off Chinese supplies (American shipping, the Burma Road, and French Indochina).
 
2012-12-07 02:33:00 PM

Mad_Radhu: It's basically a Randian wet dream over there


LOL
 
2012-12-07 02:34:52 PM

angryjd: Sorry, CNN. America is not vulnerable to attack from someone we owe two trillion dollars to. That is 20 times their annual defense budget.


If I owed 2 trillion to somebody, that would be the ONLY person I feared attack from.
 
2012-12-07 02:37:18 PM

dittybopper: you have pee hands: dittybopper: Hard, but not impossible. I can think of some options. Sub launched cruise missile attack to soften up defenses, followed by an invasion with troops and equipment concealed on a container ship (nobody would think twice about a container ship coming from China!). Take the airport by a commercial flight filled with special operations troops at roughly the same time as the missile attack. Maybe land some troops via submarine at strategic points. You might even infiltrate the population gradually, if you were patient enough.

I don't think launching an invasion cross hundreds or thousands of miles of ocean via the modern equivalent of the trojan horse is going to work particularly well, and modern giant cargo ships make particularly poor amphibious landing vessels. The real problem, though, is logistics. Both land and air transports are big and slow, and you can't run a modern military living off the land.

All you have to do is get there. Once you've got control of relatively small areas (the airport, the dock facilities), you can bring in a lot more stuff, and you can do it relatively quickly by air, and by sea for the heavier stuff.

Also, you can pre-position a lot of supplies on ships. Like I said, no one would think twice about seeing a container ship from China. Or two. Or three. The stuff doesn't have to be in containers, btw: You can build a false structure that looks like containers, but contains things like helicopters.

Not easy, but not impossible.


Except of course that a big ship, loaded to the gunnels, and having no manifest is going to raise alarm bells. Between our Navy and the UN, there are a lot of eyeballs looking at shipping as it is to ensure materials don't get to North Korea or Iran. And the airliner scenario is also a no-go. Every plane that lands or takes off needs a flight plan. Suddenly doubling the number of incoming flights is going to raise alarm bells. Having a plan inbound with no flight plan is going to raise a fighter interceptor.
 
2012-12-07 02:42:43 PM

Apik0r0s: Same motive Japan had.

Oil.


Why the fark would they attack the US for oil? Makes more sense to attack Russia. They're weaker than the US, they're right next door, and they have plenty of oil. Hell, attacking Canada for oil makes far more sense than attacking the US.
 
2012-12-07 02:43:43 PM
I thought all they had to do was knock out the satellites with an EMPa nd we were farked.

/or was it shine a laser pointer at our combat jets?
 
2012-12-07 02:48:30 PM
China's probably the least suicidal nation/state on the planet. Go to war with the US? Yeah sure... mire yourself in a bloody war with SKYNET while India eats your lunch. Preposterous.

Some of you need better War Porn.

/I know. U B Trollin'.
 
2012-12-07 02:49:25 PM

funmonger: Apik0r0s: Same motive Japan had.

Oil.

Why the fark would they attack the US for oil? Makes more sense to attack Russia. They're weaker than the US, they're right next door, and they have plenty of oil. Hell, attacking Canada for oil makes far more sense than attacking the US.


They would need to get our fleets out of the way so that they could take over the small island chains like the Spratlys. They can at least make (ridiculous) claims to the island chains, it would be a lot harder to justify taking a chunk of Russia.
 
2012-12-07 02:51:00 PM
They need to attack the US to attack Russia? Now I know you're trolling.
 
2012-12-07 02:54:30 PM
Face it: This fantasy-league war-with-the-ChiComs is something even Hollywood thinks is farfetched. It will simply never happen. Tom Clancy had to go all Harry Turtledove to make it semi plausible in his books. A US Civil War II is far, FAR more likely.
 
2012-12-07 02:54:34 PM

Evil Twin Skippy: Except of course that a big ship, loaded to the gunnels, and having no manifest is going to raise alarm bells. Between our Navy and the UN, there are a lot of eyeballs looking at shipping as it is to ensure materials don't get to North Korea or Iran. And the airliner scenario is also a no-go. Every plane that lands or takes off needs a flight plan. Suddenly doubling the number of incoming flights is going to raise alarm bells. Having a plan inbound with no flight plan is going to raise a fighter interceptor.


So you think they'd go to all that trouble and not be able to fake some manifests? Or manage to delay a few airline flights due to "mechanical difficulties" on the ground and send ones packed with troops and supplies instead? They don't even have to be originally heading in the direction of the objective: They can fly a different way and when out over the middle of the ocean where there is no radar coverage dogleg towards the objective.

Did you read the link I posted above where the People's Republic of China established a translation company in Hawaii with the specific purpose of penetrating US signals intelligence? I've worked in SIGINT. I know how tightly that kind of thing is held. And they managed to do it. Faking some manifests, and holding a few planes on the ground so there isn't a huge increase in air traffic would be child's play.
 
2012-12-07 02:55:43 PM

funmonger: They need to attack the US to attack Russia? Now I know you're trolling.


Not at ALL what I said. Read it again. Attacking Russia would be monumentally stupid of China, there's some ugly history there that doesn't need to be re-visited.

China's bellicosity of late has ALL been centered on one issue: the small chains of oil laden islands in the oceans around China. Whose Navy would stand in the way of their taking these islands over?

Not Russia's.
 
2012-12-07 03:00:14 PM

Apik0r0s: Not at ALL what I said. Read it again. Attacking Russia would be monumentally stupid of China, there's some ugly history there that doesn't need to be re-visited.


As opposed to the uglier history of China fighting the US. Oh, sorry... the UN.

Your theory still doesn't make sense, no matter how many times I read it. You said China needs Oil... so, um, how will grabbing the Spratlys give them that Oil?

Attacking Russia makes the most sense if China needs oil so badly that it's willing to fight for it. Attacking the US is suicide and you know it.
 
2012-12-07 03:02:12 PM
Timely. Just watching the movie "Air Force" now. Good movie.
 
2012-12-07 03:03:01 PM
I mean, I know there's oil there... but attacking the US for it will not give them anything but a napalm headache, or worse. Russia has more. The Russian army now sucks, and they fight the same way, using cold-war doctrine. It's Go Russia or Go Home.
 
2012-12-07 03:09:08 PM

funmonger: Apik0r0s: Not at ALL what I said. Read it again. Attacking Russia would be monumentally stupid of China, there's some ugly history there that doesn't need to be re-visited.

As opposed to the uglier history of China fighting the US. Oh, sorry... the UN.

Your theory still doesn't make sense, no matter how many times I read it. You said China needs Oil... so, um, how will grabbing the Spratlys give them that Oil?

Attacking Russia makes the most sense if China needs oil so badly that it's willing to fight for it. Attacking the US is suicide and you know it.


The better question is why attack anyone to get oil in this day and age? In the 1930s and 40s it made some sense as the international trade in energy hadn't really begun in earnest, so you needed to control the source itself. Now it would seem easier and cheaper to just buy energy on the open market.
 
2012-12-07 03:12:51 PM
There was a time when prosperity could be achieved via military conquest. That time has passed.

China and the US are never going to go to war because our economies are so intertwined, that it would be a Great Depression-level disaster for both. The same could be said for nearly any developed economies in the world.

And yes, this is a good thing.
 
2012-12-07 03:15:01 PM

Moopy Mac: The better question is why attack anyone to get oil in this day and age? In the 1930s and 40s it made some sense as the international trade in energy hadn't really begun in earnest, so you needed to control the source itself. Now it would seem easier and cheaper to just buy energy on the open market.


Very True.

China stands to benefit from recent trade deals with Canada, now a major source of oil. They make all our cheap shiat. We need something to sell back to them, after all.

There will be no war with China. Those days of Titanomachia are over.
 
2012-12-07 03:20:04 PM
I think eventually we're bound to collapse under our own bureaucratic weight if we don't tighten up on our policies and budget. Less of an implosion like Russia, more of a slow sunset like the British. All of our might slowly rusting away will leave us vulnerable... eventually.

To that end, the real question is if China's expansion will happen at a slow enough pace to allow them an outlasting strategy. China is normally a patient nation, but they simply need too many resources to keep pace with our greed.
They'll eventually have to lash out at someone, but I doubt its the US that will be their target.

/I'd be more worried if I was India, Pakistan, Vietnam (etc) or any island nation in the pacific.
/Possibly even Russia, who's had a bad habit of signing pacts with back stabbing neighbors.
/The Americans relationship to China is more of a suicide pact.
 
2012-12-07 03:26:53 PM
You never know who we're going to pay to attack us.
 
Displayed 50 of 146 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report