This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Who Would Win A Conflict In The South China Sea: The Infographic

Tyler Durden's picture




 

As regular readers are no doubt aware, the US and China are racing towards a maritime conflict stemming from Beijing’s construction of what Washington has condescendingly called “sand castles” in the Spratly archipelago. 

Atop these man-made islands are cement plants, air strips, and soon-to-be lighthouses, as China boldly asserts its territorial claims on what are heavily-contested waters though which trillions in seaborne freight pass each year.

Now, with Beijing set to enforce what is effectively a no-fly zone over its new sovereign ‘territory’ we bring you the following graphic from WSJ which shows that when it comes to sheer size, China’s air force and Navy are beyond compare.

 

More, from WSJ

China’s promise to beef up its naval capabilities to prevent further “meddling” and “provocative actions” by rivals in the South China Sea is a daunting prospect for most of its neighbors, which already view Beijing’s fast-improving armed forces with trepidation...

 

As a recent Pentagon review of China’s military modernization drive noted, “China is investing in capabilities designed to defeat adversary power projection and counter third-party—including U.S.—intervention during a crisis or conflict.” In practice, that means hundreds of ballistic and cruise missiles positioned near the coast to deter Japanese or American warships from coming anywhere near Chinese territory. China has a substantial submarine fleet as well, piling on more risk for enemy ships.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:47 | 6136829 VWAndy
VWAndy's picture

Bankers.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:49 | 6136839 kchrisc
kchrisc's picture

You are wise.

Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:57 | 6136874 Latina Lover
Latina Lover's picture

Correction, VWAndy, you mean banksters.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:02 | 6136892 VWAndy
VWAndy's picture

Real bankers are a thing of the past. I stand corrected.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:30 | 6137022 edotabin
edotabin's picture

It started with Kissinger. Then Billary sent a lot of tech and now China is beating its chest.  They inflate and deflate anyone they want, when they want.

 I think we need a missile porn article, closely followed by a "Putin plays ice polo on Unicorn" writeup and then finished off with some pipelines and bases.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:34 | 6137042 DirtyWilly
DirtyWilly's picture

Somehow I find it hard to believe Vietnam rivals our military.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:46 | 6137108 Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

Yep, because the Vietnamese could never beat the US...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:58 | 6137156 zaphod
zaphod's picture

Meh, there is a reason the US has built it's last aircraft carrier. These were the weapons of WWII. China is building an army to win the next WWII, but that is not going to be the battle.

I hate the US gov as much much as the next person here. But the US army has been spending trillions per year on advanced tech, tactics, etc. There is a reason Iraq fell in weeks, and the US didn't even have to bring out the big guns. China is copying last the century's military, if push came to shove I don't think it would work out for China as well as they think. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:03 | 6137186 BaBaBouy
BaBaBouy's picture

IF You Mess With The Chinee, They Will Announce They HAVE 10,000+ Tonnes Of GOLD, And They Will Implode The USD Instantly By Also Dumping Their US Treacheries...
Don't Mess With The Chinee...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:02 | 6137426 frankly scarlet
frankly scarlet's picture

I believe you have it nailed down....could all that silver in Morgan's vault actually belong to China as they dump treasuries for P.Ms? Some say China is now the major share holder of the Fed and want into the IMF basket so they can wreck it from within. What we see on the surface is like white knight  bu black bishop.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:15 | 6137496 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

Why wage war over these islands?  A few hundred well placed smart mines would deny use of the islands indefinitely.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:57 | 6137665 Parrotile
Parrotile's picture

Well, if the US "insists" that the waters are International, then the deliberate placement of any minefield in International waters would certainly breach a few International Conventions on Modern Warfare.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:53 | 6137916 greenskeeper carl
greenskeeper carl's picture

"international conventions on modern warfare" HA, when have silly little things like international laws EVER stopped the us govt from doing anything? never

 

Im not endorsing or encouraging such a move, but something being illegal doesn't deter them from doing it. I could list some examples, but Im sure this crowd is well aware of them

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:07 | 6137962 Publicus
Publicus's picture

World War 3 draws nearer.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:31 | 6138052 Bokkenrijder
Bokkenrijder's picture

Posting this 'infographic' is yet another low for ZH, as it's comparing the entire Chinese military to just 1 (ONE!) US carrier strike group.

What a complete bunch of nonsense! Utter drivel!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:42 | 6138079 Mentaliusanything
Mentaliusanything's picture

Yes I have to agree with that. There is not enough wiggle room in the whole Mediteranean for the entire US Fleet and an adversary's fishing tender to fit without rubbing paint.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:14 | 6138173 Bokkenrijder
Bokkenrijder's picture

Indeed, and in addition most Chinese equipment is probably cheap and low quality copy/paste stuff. Here is the launch of their 'superior' naval fleet: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/luxury-chinese-boat-launches-sinks-immedia...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 22:26 | 6138661 MonetaryApostate
MonetaryApostate's picture

The banksters all work for the crown...

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:47 | 6139006 JustUsChickensHere
JustUsChickensHere's picture

World War 3 continues

 

FIFY

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:25 | 6137539 odatruf
odatruf's picture

Tactically, how does that work beneficially for them?

So they dump the debt across maturities (notes, bills and bonds), which drives up the discount relative to the face. This has the effect of boosting the yield or interest rate paid at redemption. But, what happens in the secondary market doesn't directly affect the primary borrower (.gov). Because of the much higher yield, new issues would have to pay more to attract lending at the next primary auction, if we had an open and fair market.  I am sure you see where this is going....   When the Fed can buy 60% / 70% / 80% or higher of all new debt issued, who needs a market?

End result is that China takes a huge value hit in selling the paper for less than they paid. In the short term, the Fed buys a few more papers at the next auction and the Wall Street / Constitution Ave band keep rolling along.

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:20 | 6138021 greenskeeper carl
greenskeeper carl's picture

not only that, but if the US collapses like that, china is in bad shape too. A collapse in th USD is going to be contagious, the european economy would suffer greatly. China needs the US and europe to sell their cheap shit too. If the US and EU countries collapse economically, they aren't goign to be buying any consumer goods from china. That means millions and millions of unemployed chinese factory workers, since there aren't any other markets right now that can pick up the slack in orders. The LAST thing the chinese govt wants is a couple hundred million angry, unemployed peasants takingto the streets, probably resulting in several tianamin square type incidents, that will only further engrage them. thats why I find it quite a stretch to imagine them pulling their 'nuclear option' with US treasuries. Plus as you said, whats another few hundred billion dollars on the fed's balance sheet if it scoops them up. And there is always the 'mystery buyer' in brussels that has stepped up before.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:52 | 6137912 Rikky
Rikky's picture

fat chance.  it's a lose lose for them they would suffer irreparable harm from the loss of wealth and trade with the USA.  its an option sure but a nuclear one.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:34 | 6138513 Took Red Pill
Took Red Pill's picture

"Who Would Win "? NO ONE!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:06 | 6137197 Funny Money
Funny Money's picture

Oh, please.  China bought/stole/borrowed all of their military technology from the US.  The idea that the US can't just turn it all off on them is laughable.  China would do as well as Iraq did.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:20 | 6137253 spenny
spenny's picture

yes! but they dont want to turn them off. a short war isnt good for profits and we all know how the Bankers and Bushes like to fund both sides of long wars. the physcopaths of the world would love to see the popultion cut in half as well. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:05 | 6137446 frankly scarlet
frankly scarlet's picture

they were allowed unrestricted access to the Los Alamos rocket laboratory during the Clinton era...."to become President today you must have treason on your resume"...J.Willie

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:45 | 6137596 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

The last I checked, Iraq isn't going too well and neither is Afghanistan. 

 

We did kick the shit out of Grenada and Panama.

 

Murrrca, FUCK YEAH!!!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:54 | 6137647 Funny Money
Funny Money's picture

I didn't predict that the US would win, just that their current leaders would lose.  Sorry I didn't make it more clear.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:03 | 6137690 TheMeatTrapper
TheMeatTrapper's picture

Is that before or after Chinese hackers turn off our electric grid, shut off our nuclear power plants, open the floodgates on our dams and shut down the financial system. 

The problem is that people think the next war will be fought with airplanes and missiles. That stuff is to create jobs, make the Generals rich and give the sheeple something to argue about. The American people wouldn't be affected in the slightes if they sank an aircraft carrier - but they'd be screwed if the power went off for a few months. 

Our cities would become unlivable in weeks without a single shot ever being fired. The next war will not be fought like the last.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:04 | 6137698 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

Even if your premise was correct, your calculation would be wrong.  Washington would disable its own miliatry's systems and let an arguably technology inferior Chinese navy shot them like fish in barrel.  

Wars are never fought, and rarely won by generals or admirals.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:35 | 6137318 post turtle saver
post turtle saver's picture

actually, CVN-78 is under construction and -79 and -80 are planned through 2025... you can eventually expect Ford class to replace Nimitz class carriers across the board...

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:00 | 6137674 Parrotile
Parrotile's picture

Just in time for them to be sold off as part of war reparations - to Russia and / or China.

Probably China, seeing as they have already been paid for in full by Chinese labour . . . . . . .

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:09 | 6137462 readmylips
readmylips's picture

"the US has built it's last aircraft carrier."

 

huh? they're actively building three... Ford-class. USS Ford, USS Kennedy and USS Enterprise.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:11 | 6137476 gunsmoke011
gunsmoke011's picture

Agree 100%. ZH has become a joke with articles such as this one. the U.S. has spent trillions - and I am certain we have toys the rest of the world hasn't even dreamed of yet. With that said - it is not always about numbers anyway - the Chinese may or may not have more planesbutlets trained by the Russians or the Chinese have not fared so well when they encounter U.S. fighter piolets. Probably doesn't matter much - the country who can intercept the most EMP weapons or nukes will most likely "Win" - if there would be such a thing as a winner. In all likelyhood - a conflict will not be military - but cyber and economic. Say what you will - but the Chinese holding trillions of treasuries backed by the good faith and credit of the U.S. government are already worthless - default is just a formality. As for cyber - they sure seem to be trying to steal a lot more from us than we are from them - that ought to say something about who leads in that catagory.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:06 | 6137672 edotabin
edotabin's picture

If the actual cost is $10 but the US military spends $100k you get a lot less than what someone else would. The overall point is that these are schemes to suck everyone dry and that the size of the military means nothing. These things are pre-planned and the outcome already decided.

I'm not a cheerleader for the US or any other nation and the reason is simple:  The people that decide these things have no nation because they own the planet and could give 2 fucks about America, Uganda or any other place.

I am sick and tired of the ignorant twits (in general, not you gunsmoke011) that have been gathering around here lately and their fucking missile porn IQs. They learn two fucking things about the FED, see Putin shirtless on his unicorn, get a woody and all of a sudden they know everything. Since it is painfully obvious they are unable to tell this a shitshow, let them "point" missiles  where the sun don't shine.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:08 | 6137720 Parrotile
Parrotile's picture

Threre is also the problem of the current Ukraine "conflict", and the probably likely China Seas "conflict" being "wars of choice" for the US.

It may be of significance that the aggrieved Nations - China and Russia, now have a mutual defence policy, musch to the distaste of the US of A.

Military (and public) support for "defending the Homeland" tends to be far greater than support for "killing off a few (insert derogatory term of choice)", which  seems to be current US policy.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:56 | 6137835 edotabin
edotabin's picture

The point being that the average American can't find the Ukraine on Google maps even if he used the search feature. Am I supposed to believe the average Chinese person woke up and decided China should build islands?

This has been orchestrated since the early 70s. The US stirred shit up in China and "opened" the market. This resulted in a complete gutting of the US over the past 40 years.

The mutual defense policy is a bunch of horseshit designed to give the illusion of opposition much like the cold war was. I suppose Russia didn't have any oil in the mid 90s. It just sprung up in the last decade and made them rich so they can design their new missile and point** it at the US.

** Yes, despite billions of dollars  being spent on researching guidance systems over the past 65 years, apparently missiles still need to be pointed for some reason. ICBMs are launched, reach exceptionally high altitudes, travel extremely fast, have a range in excess of 8,000 miles but they have to be "pointed" in the right direction.

SHIT SHOW!!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:28 | 6138202 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Those islands are in the South China Sea. The Chinese see that as their territory the same as the US sees the Gulf of Mexico as their territory. How many Americans will be willing to send their children to die for the Spratley Islands?

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:54 | 6139018 Tall Tom
Tall Tom's picture

About the same number as Chinese families are willing to send their children to their deaths.

 

That is damned sad that State Media in both Nations can have so much influene, through propaganda, over the populations of both Nation States.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:49 | 6139010 Tall Tom
Tall Tom's picture

...so they [the Russians] can design their new missile and point** it at the US

 

**Yes, despite billions of dollars  being spent on researching guidance systems over the past 65 years, apparently missiles still need to be pointed for some reason. ICBMs are launched, reach exceptionally high altitudes, travel extremely fast, have a range in excess of 8,000 miles but they have to be "pointed" in the right direction.

 

ICBM Silos are vertical.

 

Pointed at, in this vernacular, means targeted toward. While programming can be changed in the flight computer there is usually a default setting. So your ridicule is about semantics? That is shallow at best.

 

ICBMs can be utilized with two different trajectory options. The High Altitude trajectory gives more time for the adversary to respond whereas the Shallow Altitude Trajectory delivers payload in the least amount of time.

 

You are correct that it is a shitshow and staged for extracting wealth from needless death.

 

But you argue semantics? That just served to weaken your otherwise solid position.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 06:05 | 6139187 edotabin
edotabin's picture

Nope. It is about mindset.

Obviously, the distictions are clear in your head. In others', not so much.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:20 | 6138189 gunsmoke011
gunsmoke011's picture

Edotabin - interesting comments. I think I know a little more than two things about the FED, wouldn't call it missle porn but I did spend 15 years working in military intel and had a dad who spent 30 years in the Army and retired as a General Officer. The Fact is - yes Eisenhower did warn of the military industrial complex in his farewell speech - but it is not true that a handful of people own the plant and therefor don't care who blows up who. They do after all have to have a place to reside when the dust settles. My point was really that the United States has weapons that are superior to anyone on this planet - we have chosen not to use them because we no longer fight to win wars but ( to your point of costing $10 and the U.S. spending 100K) to enrich a select few and make it where people who sit on their asses all day trading pieces of paper can make money. The day will come however that all of that will change - when the people rise up and claim what is theirs. Those select few you say who own the planet will be hunted like animals for what they have done (robbed the American People and the entire planet for that matter blind) - and they will be eliminated. Greed has always been at the root of all wars - and always will be. The truth is - the idea that those who call the shots for this pre planned outcome KNOW who has the technology and the military where with all to prevail - and it is NOT Russia or China. We were - up until this Bozo president - decades ahead of these other nations. Not sure we are still that far ahead, have been out of the loop for a while now, but still confident the U.S. holds the cards if we need to play them.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:18 | 6138008 LooseLee
LooseLee's picture

I shudder at the sheer devastation if China were to drop 1/2Mil soldiers on US soil........The USA is not prepared for that. Look at what 19 Camel Farmers were able to do with 'our' leadership....

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:23 | 6138197 indygo55
indygo55's picture

"Look at what 19 Camel Farmers were able to do with 'our' leadership..

Had to jump on that one. Who the fuck still thinks (except you) that 19 arabs with box cutters did 9-11? Wow! And thats the premise of your remark? Really?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:21 | 6138486 ali-ali-al-qomfri
ali-ali-al-qomfri's picture

its worse than that Looselee,

if every China man jumped off his chair at the same time, each holding $20M in treasuries, then a tsunami would race across the pacific and refill the California water table, no waite that's not right, hang on a second......

if every China man folded $20M in Treasuries into paper tiger oragami, no that's not it either.

If every China man sneezed, no......

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:48 | 6137612 Racket
Racket's picture

The Iraqi army never engaged in the 2003 invasion. Saddam didn't even order the airforce...

The chaos that would ensue was all what Saddam wanted and you don't have to look far away how that turned out to be. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:06 | 6137699 edotabin
edotabin's picture

I'm certain he wanted to hide in holes and be hanged too. He simply didn't play along and was done away with.

Do you remember the pics with Rumsfeld? They were all buddies in the 80s.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:51 | 6137632 blentus
blentus's picture

Did you just compare Iraq's military to US/China military?

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:56 | 6137925 GoldSilverBitcoinBug
GoldSilverBitcoinBug's picture

No you did not won Iraq it was just Iraqi who let enter US troops thinking they liberated from Saddam Hussein, big difference.

Also you haven't won against Taliban in Afghanistan (doing shit in a country and then leaving is not wining.)

FACT: you haven't won properly a war since WWII.

Messing with Chinese and/or Russian will be just your last international meddling...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:16 | 6138004 LooseLee
LooseLee's picture

I shudder at the sheer devastation if China were to drop 1/2Mil soldiers on US soil........The USA is not prepared for that. Look at what 19 Camel Farmers were able to do with 'our' leadership....

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:07 | 6137174 BaBaBouy
BaBaBouy's picture

Sand Castles, Or Castles In The Sand.?.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:12 | 6137221 Uchtdorf
Uchtdorf's picture

What would the Norks do? How would S Korea respond?

What if Russia, directly or indirectly, supports China? What would NATO (LOL) without the US do?

What if Russia just decided to take eastern Europe as a buffer zone again?

At what point in the fireworks display would all those Chinese university students and scientists in the US be targeted by homebound patriots?

Not many happy endings under any scenario.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 22:47 | 6138729 Karaio
Karaio's picture

Let's face it.

The Chinese will not back down, they are in their backyard!

Let alone the Russians with regard to Ukraine.

Any moron with half a brain and a globe in hand see it.

If you miss one screw that holds the handle of a pump (which was manufactured in China under technical specification) failure aboard a Aircraft Carrier is fucked up world!

He stewed in cirquito capacitor plate was produced in China.

All though the chip HD SSD 1 Tera were manufactured in Japan but they are together in Chinese factories and without Chinese you get a lot of chips to eat with milk for breakfast.

To the Jews I say the following:

Those who liked the US went to Israel (Russian Jews).

Russian Jews that Russians feel are still in Russia and will fight as Russians.

Israel is fucked as a country (if it ever was) a IIIWW.

Israel was created to be just a thorn in the Middle East, nothing more than that.

Now that shit is grabbing the fan (hence the desperation of Netanyahu), the US probably will take your field team.

Irony of history, Germany will once again be an agricultural country, Israel (if you're lucky not to turn radioactive dust) will be managed by Jewish Russian immigrants.

USA, Europe, survive the Nuclear Holocaust, return to the Middle Ages.

Perhaps preparing with sticks and stones for a IVWW as Einstein predicted.

hehe.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:36 | 6137563 all-priced-in
all-priced-in's picture

I don't know - But my guess is -

 

This is just the ONE USA carrier fight group that we have in the area right NOW - and is being compare to total force of the other countries in the same space.

 

How the fuck can we have 0 to 2 submarines?

 

We can of course move other assets into this area.

 

Looks misleading enough that the FED could have put it together.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:49 | 6137618 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

I think the rest are either undergoing maintenance or busy threatening the Iranians and Russians.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:54 | 6137643 Racket
Racket's picture

It's based on current u.s. naval activity in the area. Sure, the U.S. naval capabilities are higher and we know that but it cannot easily be relocated because they're busy all over the world. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:19 | 6138012 all-priced-in
all-priced-in's picture

I agree 100% - but if a shooting war with China breaks out - which area will become #1  priority?

 

 

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 06:09 | 6139198 edotabin
edotabin's picture

Madagascar !

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:37 | 6137577 Grinder74
Grinder74's picture

They don't.  That's the entire Vietnamese navy versus one carrier strike group.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:04 | 6138154 unicorn
unicorn's picture

but i dont wanna play polo with putin.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:52 | 6136851 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

The first answer is correct! +100

My answer below is a military answer, but YES, bankers will be the true winners, as always. Stocks will soar for financials and defense industry and military contractors, also ship yards would be a good play for repairs and new builds.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:58 | 6136880 Latina Lover
Latina Lover's picture

Dear friend JB, as you know, all wars are Bankster Wars.   S

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:27 | 6137007 Memedada
Memedada's picture

And only one war they can lose - the class war.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:12 | 6137222 Mr. Magoo
Mr. Magoo's picture

The answer is neither about the Chinese, Americans or Russians, it is all right here.

 

“If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.” Gutle Schnaper Rothschild

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:45 | 6137598 Freddie
Freddie's picture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27qdB1D0s9M

F-35's clubbed like baby seals.  The F-35 Can't turn, can't climb, can't run,

Shame it isn't like clubbing banksters.

Against Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35.   The Russians are relatively civilized versus the feral Baltimore-American culture. 

American weapons built by feral shit like Trayvon.

The f**kingSukhoi's are gorgeous planes while the F-35 is a pile of shit.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Sukhoi_Su-27SKM_at_MA...

The US RAND Corporation Research ANd Development, US and Australia Pacific Vision data.

The exercise PACAFs Pacific Vision on sept 25/08 revealed the United States air superiority is just a fantasy. The exercise was consisted of face the Red Team one hundred Su-27SM, four Su-30 and two Su-35 against Blue Team one hundred F-35, one hundred eighty seven F-22 and four hundred F/A-18E/F. The exercise showed the blue team higher in number of aircraft is double inferior when hundreds of Blue Forces aircraft were lost in the first 20 minutes downed by the Red Forces., on the other hand only 12 aircraft was downed in the Red Team.

Pacific Vision effect the production of the F-22 was canceled and the F-35 project not longer receives investment all since 2008 by Barack Hussein Obama II and Robert Michael Gates.

 

http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/2014/q3/us-loses-simulated-air-war...

 

July 28, 2014 US loses Simulated Air War with China

July 28, 2014. Santa Monica, CA. (ONN) The Rand Corporation, one of the Defense Department’s most trusted and longest running contractors, was hired by the Pentagon to carry out a computerized and simulated war between China and the US. The results were so horrifying, they were deemed classified, but were leaked to the press. What the computer models showed was that in the most likely scenario for a US-China war, the United States was soundly defeated by the Chinese military.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:12 | 6137737 chunga
chunga's picture

China has purchased Sunburn missiles from Russia. Those are supposedly pretty nasty.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:27 | 6138045 Antifaschistische
Antifaschistische's picture

I got no clue about technical military specs.....but I do know TPTB will fabricate any lie possible to get .gov to drop another $10Billion or $100Billion on a perceived problem.   So, the question is, who will get the check if this "simulation" is believed?   follow the money....that's why I don't believe it.  (and I have no opinion at all about an F35 or an SU35)

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:10 | 6138168 chunga
chunga's picture

Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics are usually found wallowing in the patriotic pork barrel.

How vulnerable are U.S. Navy vessels to advanced anti-ship cruise missiles?

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/blogs/mil-aero-blog/2013/07/how-vulnera...

Navy leaders are known to be concerned with advanced radar-guided anti-ship missiles such as the Russian-made SS-N-22 Sunburn and SS-NX-26 Oniks, which may be operational with military forces in Iran, Syria, and other countries in the Middle East for use against U.S. and allied naval forces in and around the Eastern Mediterranean, Persian Gulf, and other vital waterways.

 

The Sunburn anti-ship missile can fly at three times the speed of sound, giving targeted vessels little time to react. It carries a 705-pound explosive warhead -- twice the destructive payload of the Exocet and three times as fast.

 

The Oniks missile, more advanced than the Sunburn, can fly as fast as Mach 2.5, and carries a 661-pound warhead. Not only is this missile far faster and more powerful than the Exocet, but it may have the capability to maneuver on its terminal flight to its target, which could make defeating it difficult, if not impossible.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:18 | 6138478 Freddie
Freddie's picture

Anyone remember these naval maps circa Sept 2013 - I do.

https://iamisatthedoors.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/1236812_380862338705...

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2013...

Russian Navy daring the US Navy of Obamao/General Jack Weinstein/Trayvon/MonSATAN-o to shoot Tomahawks over the Russian navy.  Somebody blinked there.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:59 | 6136884 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

I've been waiting for China to finally move from an export to a domestic economy.

Looks like they'll be enough war for everyone!

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 06:12 | 6139199 edotabin
edotabin's picture

No more Warmart for you ! Civil war in US in3 days :-)

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:32 | 6137033 Payne
Payne's picture

Are you even aware that Sub launched Anti Aircraft missles are availalbe to China.  Arm Chair Warriors,  Arg.  They do not have to surface to launch.  Russia torpoedo tech is better the the US tech,  China will have access.  

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:57 | 6137664 Freddie
Freddie's picture

The USA had shit torpedoes for most of WW2.  MIC and the Zio-contractors send Americans out to die in endless wars with junk weapons.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 08:20 | 6139387 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Hah, where would we be without Hedy Lamarr?

[quote]

During her film career, Lamarr co-invented the technology for spread spectrum and frequency hopping communications with composer George Antheil.[3] This new technology became important to America's military during World War II because it was used in controlling torpedoes.

[/quote] -- Wikipedia

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:35 | 6137317 OpTwoMistic
OpTwoMistic's picture

"Stocks will soar for financials and defense industry"   In China, Russia?

 

Nothing will soar in the US when the lights go out. Not sure which one turns off the lights.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:21 | 6136976 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

This past May Day, or May 1st, International Workers Day --- which few Ameritards are familiar with, of course --- a march halted some downtown traffic in Seattle for a short while, and the local newsy whorescum interviewed a young male driver, who said,

"Sure, I fought for their right to protest in Iraq, but they are stealing my own time!"

This douchetard moron from Amerika's All-Volunteer Military which has added to more mental categories below what had been the standard bottom category, Mental Category 4, seriously believes he wasn't fighting for the banksters and their oil companies, but for the right of the Bush/Obama Administration to make preemptive arrests of protest march organizers and community organizers?

A complete and total idiot, of course!

Now, since they have shipped all the jobs, all the technology and all the investment to China, and brought too many of the vilest and most obnoxious Chinese to Amerika under the EB-5 program, who the fuck would anyone be fighting for should another Bankster War break out?

Fighting for their jobs in China?

Fighting for corporate investments in China?

Fighting for more tech to be shipped to China?

If those missiles kills any US military personnel, they will be using over-the-horizon missile targeting tech given them by the Clinton Administration, and if subs or tanks kill any, the will be using precision ball bearings from the factory they purchased under the Geo. W. Bush Administration.

And all this time, thanks to the latest declassified DIA report (FOIA request by Judicial Watch), we know that the US gov't through the CIA has given material support to ISIS or ISIL since 2012, just as this gov't financed and armed al Qaeda, and the Taliban, and only the lord knows how many other terrorist groups.

Time to go after the real terrorists on Wall Street!

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:54 | 6137646 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

The problem with these socialist scumbag activists is they are fighting for their own version of totalitarianism. They don't want the TPP, but they want open borders to replace American workers with a flood of third world labor. Instead of attacking Wall Street banks, they loot and burn small mom & pop businesses. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:29 | 6138201 Charming Anarchist
Charming Anarchist's picture

The problem with these moles-dressed-up-as-socialist scumbag activists is they are fighting for Wall Street and banks.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:33 | 6138212 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

I believe there are some government agitators inside those groups. At any point, the Occupy Wall St idiots could have converged on Wall Street and caused chaos. They didn't. 

You're telling me that socialists want freedom and liberty? Since when? Most of them are elitists or think they're elitists and hate the working class

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:51 | 6137084 datura
datura's picture

...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:59 | 6137671 HolyfieldsOtherEar
HolyfieldsOtherEar's picture

HAHAHAHAHAHA

 

China can have all the ships it wants. What wins naval conflicts, campers, is attack submarines. China's subs are so slow and noisy that in effect it has NONE. China would lose a naval conflict with Japan in a week even without US support.

Quality beats quantity every time.

And China knows that damn well.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:44 | 6137879 antforest
antforest's picture

Tell that to the Germans...

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 08:23 | 6139392 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Aye, Quantity has a Quality all its own...

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:49 | 6139011 cybervigilante
cybervigilante's picture

Given what we have done in South America, the Ukraine, and the Middle East, China may have a point about our "meddling." But given the imbalance in conventional power, looks like an excuse to use nukes. As for US high tech winning the war, China now files more patents than the US as our educational system goes to hell with students mired in debt. And who supplies most of our high tech gear? China. Don't assume they are behind us tech-wise, anymore.

Read "War is a Racket" by General Smedley Butler, a great American hero but unsung since he foiled the Banksters coup many years ago, and they erased him from history, since the Banksters won. We have robbed and raped the world, especially Latin America, for a hundred years. Maybe it's just China's turn. Anyway, the banksters will have nukes flying over the Ukraine long before that. I figure banksters have found a way to be radiation-proof since they're working so hard for WWIII. And as Einstein pointed out WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones. Still, this appears in Rupert's Rag, so I take anything from there with a grain of salt.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:53 | 6139012 cybervigilante
cybervigilante's picture

Omitting mistaken duplicate.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:48 | 6136833 kchrisc
kchrisc's picture

"Who Would Win A Conflict In The South China Sea"

He who needs to borrow the least from China.

What did I win?

Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:50 | 6136841 10mm
10mm's picture

Subs will haunt.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:50 | 6136843 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

The US Navy has been built and trained to fight this exact war. It might be costly, but the USN would quickly control all the seas, and Chinese Navy would be wiped out, except perhaps for part of their Submarine Fleet. I am not saying it will be cheap, but the USN is so large and well equipped and the fighting would take place so far from Main Land China, that is would be disaster for China. This is based on the US outspending the Chinese on Naval Forces by 20 to 1 for decades. The US Air Force could also get in on the act, making the air component of the US battle forces just huge. This is not a conflict the Chinese should ever contemplate.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:55 | 6136863 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

We will see that modern missile technology makes navies virtually obsolete.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:00 | 6136885 Latina Lover
Latina Lover's picture

JB, standing up to the Hegemon, even if you lose,  can be a victory. Resistance is NOT futile.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:06 | 6137202 SpiOpsChiwowwow
SpiOpsChiwowwow's picture

A well placed Spi will make all your missiles obsolete!

Chiwowwow rules!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:19 | 6137250 Joe Tierney
Joe Tierney's picture

LL said, "Resistance is NOT futile." (as he sits safe and secure in his basement game room)

 

Neither are capacitance and inductance. I hope that resonates.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:04 | 6136902 inevitablecollapse
inevitablecollapse's picture

Just to play devil's advocate, how close do you think a DDG would need to be to make an impact on either the Spratleys or naval and air assets on mainland China?  BGM-109 has a 600 NM range.  As long as it were kept 'conventional' the USN would have the upper hand.  Even the JY-62 has around a 400 NM range so navy assets could do damage without being within the envelope of Chinese cruise missile technology.  Heard it from a friend, so who knows...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:07 | 6136910 inevitablecollapse
inevitablecollapse's picture

Also want to caveat this by saying we need to stay the fuck out of this whole mess.  As a Navy veteran on the intel side, I'm 100% fed up with this administration's and prior administration's adventures...But there is an OPLAN for this...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:19 | 6136969 TeethVillage88s
TeethVillage88s's picture

Real Problem is both Nations feel they have too many Useless Eaters and so there is no Nuclear Deterrent.

Say US-Japan can not survive around the Islands and Missiles don't find their targets due to Counter-Defenses, the Nuclear war is one.

They will spare many of China's Factories since we will still need their workforce and Exports.

- Labor Rate will be Slashed post war in China
- Post War Wall Street Profits will Increase
- MIC Spending will be high for 10 years
- Rebuilding costs will profit US Banks if not US Economy

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:12 | 6136938 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

To understand the battle that would take place, we need to consider the entire force structure of the American force that engages the Chinese. Carriers will stand well clear of Chinese missiles and launch air strikes. USN submaries will haunt the Chinese seas, killing ships by the hundreds. USN surface warships will be tasked with defending the Carriers, and their Air Wings will do all the real fighting. That is doctrine, trained for for decades. The US Air Force has bases and can use Navy and Marine corps sirfields, along with allies air fields. The total air power the US would field would be huge, using an array of missiles, lazer bombs and the like, even aircraft can launch attacks at stand off ranges to begin with.

At sea, I imagine something like the first Iraq war. Total massacre. I seriously base my opinion on my time in the Navy and a lifetime of keeping up with Naval events, forces and doctrine. I read professional naval journals weekly, to keep up. I just have to say, if you are familiar with todays USN, there is no way they can't handle this.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:20 | 6136972 Barnaby
Barnaby's picture

Yank Space Plane Takes Giant Crap, China Devastated

The Guardian

"A week after simple provocation yielded a war of words in the disputed China Sea, the United States answered the seeming ultimatum with a fiery turd from an aeroplane in space... Read more"

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:24 | 6136983 kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

 

Well said, Jack.

China is decades away from a blue water navy, at best.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:12 | 6137220 SpiOpsChiwowwow
SpiOpsChiwowwow's picture

You two are idiots.

Their ground game once it hits US soil will make your little USSA joo's shit their Anchors Away briefs(http://shop.nordstrom.com).

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:23 | 6137536 kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

So they are going to swim the Pacific,

  or maybe come over in rubber duckies?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:28 | 6138046 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

It is okay really, most people don't understand naval warfare or the doctrine that goes into it. Land War is far more common, and that caputres people's minds. Naval Warfare is a specialty that few are familiar with. The Chinese should be the "Sea Denianl Force", but they can't accomplish that so far from their own shores. This would be a Blue Water Navak conflict, just what the force structure of the USN was built to do. Maybe in 25 years, China could fight in Blue Water, but not now. For sure, not now.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:46 | 6138100 Counterpunch
Counterpunch's picture

I would tend to defer to your assessments of naval capability Jack, for sure, but I do wonder if you are not accounting for Chinese preparations for how the USN would try to operate, as well as electronic countermeasures and help from Russia.

Chinese subs hunting carriers is one thing, add to that Russian subs and I wouldn't want to be on a carrier.  Without all the carriers the USN would bring to the party, the air campaign degrades rapidly.

I don't believe the Chinese would fight the war the USN wants or expect them to.  In any event, you may be right, but  I think we also have to wonder/worry about Chinese tech or tech upgrades we may not be aware of. 

Confirmed: China Deploys New 'Carrier Killer' Missile | The ... China's 'New' Carrier Killer Subs | The Diplomat

...

but

China's Carrier Killer: Threat and Theatrics - Air Force ...  [cache no pw link]
Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:28 | 6137012 TeethVillage88s
TeethVillage88s's picture

Jack how is the Quality Control of our Munitions, Bombs, Missiles, etc?

I guess in the 1990s we cut defense Quality Inspectors so that deliveries often don't have any inspection at boats/ships. Of course factory Inspection is more efficient and that is how we got through the Last two wars.

But supply chains are spread out pretty far and Corporate Ownership keeps changing hands. We use a lot of BAE material for instance.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:02 | 6137427 Boondocker
Boondocker's picture

I have seen munitions from 1985 to 2005,  not very many duds....and it seemed worse in 1985 than 2005.i have seen a lot of Soviet and Russian hardware....some is great, but the more complex stuff had lots of failures.  the limited Chinese munitions I have seen was crap.i am not talking about small arms lest someone want to point out the AK...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:31 | 6137559 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

what complex  failed russian hardware have you seen ? Let us know .

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:35 | 6137050 Anarchy 99
Anarchy 99's picture

are you drunk??????????

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:38 | 6137072 inevitablecollapse
inevitablecollapse's picture

Studied China and NK both pretty in-depth during my stint from 2000 - 2005 so I pretty much agree with everything you stated.  China is still working with a littoral Navy for the most part, the one wild card would be their Kilo subs, those things scare(d) the shit out of me.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:27 | 6137234 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

With due deference, JB, you are overlooking a Game Changer:  DRONES.  By the Thousands or Tens of Thousands.

Good luck in shooting down 1,000 Drones coming at ya, Carrier Carl Winson.  NO Gatling guns aboard your ships can stop them.  And they'd have to stop ALL of them, not just "most".  Especially if they play Dirty Pool, get creative and combine said Terrain-hugging Drones (Mach 1) with extreme speed Rockets (Mach 5-10), timed to arrive at about the same time. 

Can you say "BANDWIDTH OVERLOAD"?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:49 | 6137368 ShorTed
ShorTed's picture

All very good points, Captain.  But if you've thought of them, chances are the computers that do the war planning have figured those scenarios as well.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:09 | 6137467 Boondocker
Boondocker's picture

Good point  about the potential for use of drones but the Chinese drones we have stolen and surveilled aren't very good yet, but if they can put 20000 in the air at once on one target, then yes they have a problem.  haven't seen anything that shows that.they have a million plus FUNCTIONAL drones.....kind of like some of the planes they have at various bases.....looks impressive until you realize they don't have engines and their stacks of ordinance are just empty shells.  that said, their subs and torpedoes do work and work well.

 

 

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:47 | 6137606 geno-econ
geno-econ's picture

Primarily winning sea battles  gives you control over sea lanes  impacting international trade which both China and US need to remain economically vibrant, so no one wins in a confrontation.   Sea lanes are also important in the logistics of supporting land warfare but China cannot overun America and US cannot occupy China let alone Iraq, Afghanistan or other ME countries where military equipment is more than plentifull.  China would be better off spreading their influence in Asia via commercial relations. Any real confrontation would more likely occur in Eastern Europe  where territorial , religious, social and energy disputes abound along with fiat debt financing issues.  In the Mediteranian and Baltic Seas naval power is secondary to land armies, armor, artillary and air power. Here Russia has some distinct advantages although mostly defensive. It would seem the US has a gigantic military establishment with nowhere to deploy it  advantageously.  Perhaps we have reached the limits of military power expansion and should reduce military spending accordingly.  Problem is it is not very patriotic, does not win elections and confronts Neocons and the MI complex. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:01 | 6137680 GOSPLAN HERO
GOSPLAN HERO's picture

Nukes will change balance between fleets.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:09 | 6137725 Fedaykinx
Fedaykinx's picture

articles like this only serve to show who is either unable or unwilling to discern idiotic propaganda from reality.  i don't always agree with jack burton but we're on the same page with this one.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:13 | 6137742 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

Jack Burton, when was the last serious battle among first-class tech world Powers, by land, air or sea?

Like bankers, military strategists need useful real data... and fresh

and that's the reason to be that extra cautios with any prediction

I see that it's really popular, this MIC sponsored thumping of chests

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:16 | 6137769 Boomberg
Boomberg's picture

US has lost every war they fought since WWII, except for Granada, despite overwhelming technology and material. They also lost a war to China in the 1950s with the US having a far superior navy and air force at the time. Uneducated, lightly armed Chinese army kicked the US 8th Army's ass BAD and ended McArthur's godhood and career. Any war fought by the US military will on the surface and in the short term appear as a victory to the average US citizen, but in reality will be a defeat as so many times has happened in the past. If a war breaks out with China, the US is the automatic loser just because the war started in the first place, despite what Brian Williams and Fox News tells you. The US will never win a war against China, or Russia for that matter. US citizens haven't experience the horror of true war since 1865. The next one will make 1865 look like a picnic, and the potential enemies can stomach the hardship, but the US cannot.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:44 | 6138091 Freddie
Freddie's picture

I read professional naval journals weekly

Are they in Yiddish?

Is Air Force Major General Jack Weinstein in charge of the USSA nuke missiles your hero? 

Nice how the Lat and Long are provided on Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_E._Warren_Air_Force_Base

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:54 | 6138123 Counterpunch
Counterpunch's picture

The Air Force would need to pull planes from lots of places which, politically and strategically, there would be great resistance to.  They also would have their hands full with antiaircraft and jamming systems.  And the Chinese have a fighter or two. 

In my view, fwiw, much depends on how willing tptb are to pull assets out of eastern europe and the middle east. 

China is not Iraq.  Ultimately, the very superior USAF and USN may well neutralize most air and sea defense, but they are not landing any Marines or soldiers on the mainland, and the Navy, especially will pay a heavier price than you seem willing to concede, imo.  Again, fwiw and I certainly defer to your knowledge of naval strategy so please do take this mere opinion in the spirit offered.

 

I'm sure we both agree its not a fight worth getting into.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 22:29 | 6138671 teslaberry
teslaberry's picture

i actually tend to agree with you, but you are missing something very obvously important. 

 

any conflict between a rising chinese navy and the u.s. is a conflict the u.s. can only lose face. 

 

either the u.s. navy is rendered vulnerable by the chinese navy making a good showing or a dominant showing. OR THE U.S. GETS TO SHOW THE WORLD IT IS GOING TO FUCK IT'S ASSHOLE LIKE IT FUCKED CHINAS ASSHOLE. 

the empire is going to be more naked than ever. and the entire world will begin uniting agianst the u.s. 

 

THE NEXT CONFLICT BETWEEN THE U.S. AND ANY COUNTRY WITH ECONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE IS NOT ONE THAT WILL WORK WELL for the u.s 

 

in general the u.s is a decaying super power and so politically it doesn't really ahve 'good moves' anymore. 

the internationalists are hard at work turning the u.s. into a chinese style dictatorship , and it's happening none to soon. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:38 | 6137071 Payne
Payne's picture

Missles and Bombs have not been militarily usefull since Vietnam.  Yes they can destroy objects of value, but that is the limit.  The US want to only fight computer games at a distance.  Now imagine that you have built lots of decoys and at the same time re positioned your subs off of the coast of LA and Seattle.  What is the outcome now ?  I am USN as well but Air Tactical officer.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:15 | 6137233 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Don't confuse naval warfare with land warfare. A sunken ship by one missile is a good ROI.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:34 | 6137308 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

As te Royal navy found out in the Falklands.

Missile tech has come a long way since then,especially anit ship weaponry.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:21 | 6138488 Freddie
Freddie's picture

So you serve your commander Obamao and General Jack Weinstein.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 04:20 | 6139133 IronForge
IronForge's picture

Doctor,

You forget that many Tactical Missiles - and ICBMs are placed ON SHIPS and SUBMARINES.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:54 | 6136865 froze25
froze25's picture

Agreed, unless that Magrav tech is real.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:08 | 6137458 ShorTed
ShorTed's picture

If it was real you'd either never have heard of it or everyone would know about it.  Since you know about it...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:58 | 6136868 DutchR
DutchR's picture

Wait what, so Chinese nukes are not part of this game?

 

Fuck me, hairless apes going at war, AGAIN, on a planet we cannot escape........

 

nobody wins, ok, bankers

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:24 | 6136990 Frankie Carbone
Frankie Carbone's picture

Nuclear weapons are immoral and the work of Satan himself. 

Unless of course, the yield is very high, and it detonates a few thousand meters above a banker's castle, with it and its family inside, and takes out the neighborhood of uber wealthy scabbed kneed, support staff (lawyers, foundation heads, lobbyists, ect...) that also happen to occupy the same neighborhood. 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:26 | 6137277 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Nukes are indeed 'immoral', but I assure you that they are "the work of Man".

But they are useful as a Sampson Option kind of deterrent to Alien (Terrestrial and Extraterrestrial) forces.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:39 | 6137338 NoDecaf
NoDecaf's picture

Nukes? Probably won't even get that far...not a single item will be on the shelves in Walmart. Fucking checkmate if you ask me...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:57 | 6136876 Edward Morbius
Edward Morbius's picture

Sorry, but there is no way our Peace Prize winning President would allow the US Navy to win a battle, much less a war. Witness Iraq and Afghanistan.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 13:58 | 6136881 spacecadet
spacecadet's picture

Jack Burton, I agree with your summary. China's advantage is Obama in the White House. They may just get away with this move.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:05 | 6136907 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

What the fuck do puppets have to do with anything? If the banksters want war, not even a self-propelled puppet like JFK could stop them.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:34 | 6137044 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

What the fuck do puppets have to do with anything? If the banksters want war, not even a self-propelled puppet like JFK could stop them.

+100

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:01 | 6136888 MrPalladium
MrPalladium's picture

Our U.S. surface vessels are the equivalent of the horse cavalry at the beginning of WW1.

They will all be sunk in the first few days.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:07 | 6136912 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Well, at least it will create lots of war memorials for the families of the fallen to rally around.

/sad sarc

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:24 | 6138492 Freddie
Freddie's picture

Where is the USS Liberty memroial?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:10 | 6137470 ShorTed
ShorTed's picture

Based on what?

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:52 | 6139016 Counterpunch
Counterpunch's picture

thousands of hypersonic anti-ship missiles the chines would deploy from the coast as well as the air.

 

I'm guessing.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:03 | 6136901 Omen IV
Omen IV's picture

Interesting comment - dont have knowledge of values of strike capability of various assets -

but if china has 58 submarines whch can go to 100 in relatively short period of time  then isnt many of the US water born assets neutralized with large losses - with even China taking bigger huge losses  -

the  asset  is aircraft capability / numbers /  quality  and if you put up 1,000 jets into the sky given proximity to field of battle of Okinawa  / other Japanese / Philippine bases vs mainland china  

seems it would be at least a substantial fight all the way around? 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:10 | 6136933 TeethVillage88s
TeethVillage88s's picture

Well and if I was China I would try to Blockade the USA with those Submarines striking commercial vessels and even fishing vessels. Guerrilla Warfare in the Sea. Strike and disappear while building more subs and training more men and women to operate them. So I would expect them to try to drag out the war and break our will.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:33 | 6137041 spacecadet
spacecadet's picture

TeethVillage88s "So I would expect them to try to drag out the war and break our will."

Break our will? Patriotic American's would never buy another China made crap product. I wouldn't doubt if the entire Western world did the same, including Japan, Vietnam etc...
China's economy would be in shambles, truth be told, our econonomies would suffer also.
I call B.S on all this. Nothing's going to happen. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:46 | 6137111 TeethVillage88s
TeethVillage88s's picture

Yeah WSJ article so seems like neocon propaganda.

I'm just trying to visualize tactics and different kinds of war.

We have Blockades, Trade Sanctions, NATO & EU Cooperation in Trade Sanctions,... we effectively have attacked the Ruble and their Economy in Russia Federation. But they now can invest in Logistics and relationships with China. Probably this will toughen up the Russians a little. China will find a way to turn a profit through Silk Road.

But do all wars have to be Quick?

Could we still trade with China while taking losses in a slow simmering war for years?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:36 | 6137053 Fun Facts
Fun Facts's picture

The US population equals the rounding error in estimating the Chinese population.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:39 | 6137073 Dr. Bonzo
Dr. Bonzo's picture

The US wouldn't float their navy into that until they controlled the skies. If it were the Russian air force I would give the Russians a 50-50 chance at giving the US a run for their money, but the Chinese? My overall impressions of many Asian pilots is they're just piss poor pilots. Thinking outside the proverbial box is just something that's relevant in aviation, and most Asian pilots are raised in system environment where the aviator is nothing but a widget and "thinking outside the box" is not a cultural trait that is embraced in their systems. I doubt the PLA air arm is any different. No amount of weapon systems can make up for a complete lack of airmanship.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:03 | 6137436 CuttingEdge
CuttingEdge's picture

And the US has that amazing $1.5 trillion F-35.

Err...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:12 | 6137478 ShorTed
ShorTed's picture

Their subs are mostly old diesel clunkers with a few modern nukes in the mix.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:08 | 6136916 Coke and Hookers
Coke and Hookers's picture

This is exactly right. I think the USN would mop the floor with the Chinese. Modern military forces are "systems" and wars and battles are "processes" and that's the approach the US takes. Number of aircraft or other hardware is almost irrelevant if you can't manage your system and processes properly. However, the comment about modern missile tech is very relevant. The Russians are aware of US systems and battle processes superiority and have been responding in recent years - both by massive training initiatives and emphasis on their superior missile tech. Many of the long range bomber flights are training missions to prepare for taking out entire US fleets with missiles and thereby compensating for US battle system superiority.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:49 | 6137364 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Just imagine having to deal with the Chinese version of "Stalin Organs"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bWt81vhIyY

Lest we forget, it was the CHINESE who invented this many centuries ago, using blackpowder to propell rocket batteries.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:50 | 6137370 post turtle saver
post turtle saver's picture

haha suck it losers... hard data trumps all...

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!