This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.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 - 14:36 | 6137051 Consuelo
Consuelo's picture

Au Contraire...

There is a HUGE 'strategic need' for the U.S. to confront China (or anyone else on the Wolfowitz Doctrine/New American Century) list.    This is already set in stone, and now looks to be set in motion.    We'll soon find out.

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:02 | 6137182 dark_matter
dark_matter's picture

Mabye so, but in the last 50 years the US has been careful to only attack relatively weak countries they know they could easily beat and that could not retaliate and attack us. Fighthing China would depart from the Bully Doctrine that has kept America proud for half a century.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:33 | 6137038 Consuelo
Consuelo's picture

Any mention of the Russian component in this upcoming conflict?    Either in terms of equipment, support personnel or more...?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:53 | 6138261 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Most likely intel and selling weapons. China would also need Russian oil very badly as the US could easily stop all tankers from entering the South China Sea. China could also escalate by prodding NK to attack SK. That would divert US attention and resources into a land battle. 

Japan would likely stay neutral as China could easily sink ships headed to Japan with much needed raw materials. They don't need to sink even 10% of the ships to collapse what is left of Japan. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:34 | 6137043 q99x2
Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:35 | 6137048 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

The simple answer is ...we all lose

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:58 | 6137166 dark_matter
dark_matter's picture

Ah, you don't work for Raytheon, do you.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:36 | 6137049 ChargingHandle
ChargingHandle's picture

Unfortunately Obama has succeeded in diminishing the us clout. We are no longer the world power. I for one stopped buying Chinese made products (very hard). I can no longer support an economy that will be an enemy more soon than later 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:36 | 6137055 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

How much US trade passes through there again?

 

"Like about zero"?

 

Why is our Government constantly buying Yuan again?

 

" so we can build 500 million dollar homes and 100 thousand dollar cars"?

 

Wow, gee thanks.

Don't lose your entire Navy in the first five minutes...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:37 | 6137058 Rikeska
Rikeska's picture

Chinese naval ships. Funny.  Do they have tugboats to tow them around?

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:09 | 6137465 post turtle saver
post turtle saver's picture

they're called "junks" for a reason...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:40 | 6137585 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

yeah yeah only us ships are top class rest suck . Exceptionalism much genius isn't it ?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:06 | 6138448 Rikeska
Rikeska's picture

Me thinks thou protesteth to mucheth.

Confucius say Man who boat can go onree through backyard pond may only shoot smarr fish.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:37 | 6137064 ILikeBoats
ILikeBoats's picture

Sorry, the premise of the article is stupid... the hidden but true purpose is either, sell a bunch of arms to the Philippines, Japanese, whoever (more debt, more sales for MIC), or, the Phils begs Uncle Sam to re-open their naval bases in that country.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:45 | 6137100 spacecadet
spacecadet's picture

I doubt it would be a head on fight. Proxy war fought by Japan, throw Vietnam in there too.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:50 | 6137128 Salzburg1756
Salzburg1756's picture

Goodbye Waikiki!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 14:56 | 6137155 kanoli
kanoli's picture

This comparison is numerically biased against the US forces because it does not include the Air Force and Navy assets stationed in the Philippines.  Those assets are within striking distance of the Spratley Islands.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:06 | 6137172 bankonzhongguo
bankonzhongguo's picture

The US and China are not going to war.

The US cannot do anything about the China Spratly bases.

This is why the US entered into a long term agreement to base Marines in Australia.

One typhoon and those sand bars will be gone.

Expensive way to operate, yet so is Diego Garcia.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:10 | 6137727 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

That's a fair analysis.  The beaches of these man-made islands will have to be hardened with rocks and concrete, to take the beating from the waves.  Maybe have a secondary wall that's submersed and will take most of the pounding, thus creating a calm ring around the island.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:16 | 6137213 Circle of DNA
Circle of DNA's picture

Chinese are not interested in any form of chaos but if they are pushed into a corner they will dump US treasures and sink the empire into its own shit. All that will be left of it are just a bunch of american boats full of dudes begging for a refugee status in China.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:11 | 6137215 InvalidID
InvalidID's picture

 

 Why this info graphic shows other nations whole navies and the US only gets 1 carrier group?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:12 | 6137223 Benjamin123
Benjamin123's picture

They must follow the narrative.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 03:49 | 6139118 napper
napper's picture

It's post-war figures. China knows that the US is behind the mess and attacks US navy only. So after the war, other navies  are intact, whereas US navy is reduced to  1 carrier group.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:11 | 6137217 Benjamin123
Benjamin123's picture

Im positive war outcomes are decided by counting frigates and bombers. Like all wars are total wars and no resource is spared in the name of survival and victory. Like no one gives up before being on the brink of annihilation, hein?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:13 | 6137225 mastersnark
mastersnark's picture

For the Spratleys, any American would give his only begotten son.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:16 | 6137242 dash8flyer
dash8flyer's picture

The Navy would be able to handle China barring leadership incompetence or political interference like Johnson did in the Vietnam conflict. The question is whether the American public would be able to handle the casualties. Mondern weaponry used between fairly equal foes is devastating. I do not think the public would be able to handle the carnage.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:24 | 6137270 basho
basho's picture

"The Navy would be able to handle China"

sources?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:18 | 6137244 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Hello. Just a test. Move along kids.  

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:18 | 6137246 Grimaldus
Grimaldus's picture

A Chinese/USA naval confrontation would get real nasty real quick. The progressive assclown criminals in charge (obama) have been purging the Navy of all the most capable warfighters in favor of gay and lesbian advocates. The Navy is so full of bird-brain progressive assclowns they will undoubtedly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in a combat situation. The progressive stupid, it burns.

The USA has some upper hand though in that there are a couple boomers parked out close to the Chinese mainland all the times. Lord knows what they can deliver but I am betting these boats are stuffed to the gills with personalized tomahawks. Each big shot arrogant bastard Chinese leader has one with his name on it and there are plenty to go around.

Every once in a while the boomers do a coordinated "pop up" to let the Chinese see how close they didn't know they were.

Grimaldus

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:14 | 6137753 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

I'd keep an eye on a far more strategic piece of ocean:  The Straight of Malacca.

Build a man-made island there, and thing begin to look real interesting.  China just might have to do it, to front-run anyone else (the USN) from blocking it.  It's official purpose will also to have a "Lighthouse for enhanced navigation", of course.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:38 | 6139055 bid the soldier...
bid the soldiers shoot's picture

How many more days does it take to bypass the Strait of Malacca, sail down west of Malaysia past Jacarta, through Indonesia, and up west of the Philippines into the home waters of the South China Sea?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:20 | 6138019 Freddie
Freddie's picture

Wake me when anyone in the US Military would uphold their Constitutional Oath against foreign AND DOMESTIC enemies.

They have not since the first major bankster war of Genocide in teh USA in 1861.   Dumb sheep.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:23 | 6137264 basho
basho's picture

maybe somebody should show this chart to the neo-cons in the pentgram.

moronic

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:27 | 6137282 yogibear
yogibear's picture

The liberal media is keeping very quiet about this.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:27 | 6137284 bid the soldier...
bid the soldiers shoot's picture

common sense tells us that any conflict in the South China Sea will begin with sniping and tit for tat hits.  

Will China demand the last tit?  Will the US let China have the last tit?

If the US doesn't get the last tit, is it all over for them?

Stay tuned.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:36 | 6137292 SilverFish
SilverFish's picture

There is no "we" in this stupid game. It's only the people making a profit off of the dead and the soon-to-be dead being suckered into a patriotic fury by the "leaders" of their side, who JUST SO HAPPEN to be the ones that got us into the mess that brought us here in the first place. Imagine, if you will, every single mindless robot on both sides of this battle being blown to bits simultaneously.........all that would happen then would be the two leaders left, flipping a fucking coin to decide who gets what, cuz they sure as hell won't break a sweat or fuck up their manicures to go at each others throats for it.

 

Nobody wins this war, trust me.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:31 | 6137298 rosiescenario
rosiescenario's picture

Yet once again, special interest groups are able to get our government to pursue goals that are diametrically opposed to the benefit of the avergae U.S. citizen.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:32 | 6137302 Sutton
Sutton's picture

As we're now the first openly queer military since Thebes, I think we could get routed or be the first to go nuclear.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:35 | 6137315 Raul44
Raul44's picture

How about nukes?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:40 | 6137322 Bernardo Gui
Bernardo Gui's picture

This article is highly misleading. The US subsribes to the "trip wire theory," in that attcking a carrier battle group would constitute an act of war.  Such an attack would mean the entire US arsenal would be made available.  That arsenal would include anywhere from three to five additional carrier groups, every attack sub assigned to the Pacific, B-52s and B-2s from Guam, F-15s and A-10s from Japan and South Korea, every missile cruiser and destroyer in the Pacific, all long range bombers stationed in the US, and last but not least, the Ohio Class ballistic missile submarines stationed at Bangor, WA and on patrol in the Pacific.  Furthermore, the Chinese have never been tested in combat nor have they ever engaged in a naval battle.  Their sailors and pilots are untested, as are their commanders.  In war, experience matters. Having sad this, the biggest danger to the US, is that the trip wire theory is premised upon a willing and able POTUS who would retaliate in kind.  Obama is the weak link, and the ChiComs know it.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:01 | 6137422 Lea
Lea's picture

"Furthermore, the Chinese have never been tested in combat nor have they ever engaged in a naval battle."

Maybe not, but they are fucking highly motivated and trained to the point of excellence. Read some history.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:14 | 6137490 CuttingEdge
CuttingEdge's picture

There are also an awful fucking lot of them.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:25 | 6138033 Freddie
Freddie's picture

China also does not have a Baltimore or Trayvonville.

ZH has a lot of ex-semen and military who like MIC penile.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:45 | 6137884 blentus
blentus's picture

What I have gathered from your analysis is that you have never ever been close to a real fucking war.

Got it.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:00 | 6138280 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

In a prolonged war, once our first wave of Marines and special forces are wiped out, we are toast. What we have left are metrosexuals, illegal immigrants, and gentle giants. This isn't the America of 1945 or even 1975. 

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:43 | 6139063 bid the soldier...
bid the soldiers shoot's picture

but

the Chinese have never been tested in combat nor have they ever engaged in a naval battle.  Their sailors and pilots are untested, as are their commanders. 

That's what the arabs said about 'you-know-who' in 1948.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:42 | 6137348 jldpc
jldpc's picture

War is stupid and unnecessary. The key concept is "Boycott" all Chinese manufactured goods from entry into the USA. Let US consumers declare "War" on China. There are many other countries willing and able top replace their competition from the Chinese. Besides the Chinese have stolen all of our technology and deserve a real beating.  Best part, no US servicemen are injured or killed. 2nd best part, the scum international corps that have run over to China and left us without jobs, andwho do not bring their profits back here to be taxec, will corporations have to deal with the angry US consumers and taxpayers. About time. The Chinese debt fiasco will implode, the peasants will revolt, and the Communist Party may well be run out of town - finally. Anybody want to join me in promoting this really "good idea."

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:55 | 6137389 Mike Honcho
Mike Honcho's picture

If you boycotted all Chiese goods, you would walk naked and sit in a field somewhere.  That boycott would happen....post war.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:59 | 6137407 yogibear
yogibear's picture

Many automotive parts come from China along with all the clothes.

 

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:19 | 6137519 CuttingEdge
CuttingEdge's picture

Last I looked Bernanke's $17 trillion US debt fiasco made the Chinese one look like small potatoes in comparison.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:46 | 6137356 objectivist
objectivist's picture

This gives a very misleading account of the balance of power for the following reasons:

 

1.  It gives a cartoonish comparison of simply numbers of ships, though makes no attempt to calculate the tonnage or effectiveess of ships.

2.  It only shows the forces that the US has there today.  Note that the US has 12 carrier groups and could quickly (a few weeks) bring 2 or 3 more carrie groups and associated support into the region as tensions escalate.  China has no similar capability to ramp up forces quickly.

3.  It make no account of who has the most of best anti-ship missiles (e.g. Harpoon). 

4.  It makes no account of who has the best anti-TBM capabilities (e.g. Patriot). 

 

While China might currently have more force in the area, that could change quickly.  In the first few hours of a conflict that seemingly superiority could turn on a dime. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:54 | 6137387 random999
random999's picture

lol yes I'm sure that 1 carrier group will still be alive 2-3 weeks in a full out war with china.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:04 | 6137439 Hyjinx
Hyjinx's picture

And what exactly do you think would be left of their shit?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:02 | 6138286 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

They have a few thousand cruise missiles that can be aimed at the carrier group. Their ships don't even need to leave port. We would be fighting in their backyard. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:47 | 6137888 blentus
blentus's picture

3.  It make no account of who has the most of best anti-ship missiles (e.g. Harpoon). 

4.  It makes no account of who has the best anti-TBM capabilities (e.g. Patriot).

I come to ZH to read pure gold like this.

I mean, man, you really couldn't do better than this.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:38 | 6138066 Freddie
Freddie's picture

Patriot as in Patriot anti missile system.  You are joking right?   US defense contractors are all about buying congress, meating wall street expectations and starting new proxiy wars and exporting useless shit helped by The Clinton Foundation.

What wars have seen top of the line Russian stuff?

Lebanon 2006 is one example where Russian Kornet and Metis anti-tank missiles opened up Israeli Merkava tanks like beer cans.  The Merkava was supposedly better than the M1.  Also a few M1s were taken out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzVEduKGUws

Can the Patriot do this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPpGIKNggdM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVIF7qUv0VI

 

Anti-ship missiles?  Guess you never heard of the Chinese Mach 10 anti-ship missiles and Russia's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUhFXHxHslc

Or the Russian Onyx/Sunburn/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbzZC1vDfo8

You American's are all Oboma, Trayvole Baltimore boys and TV and Hollywood watching brainwashed sheep.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:31 | 6138358 InvalidID
InvalidID's picture

 

 I can't speak for many of the systems but the Sunburn missiles I can attest are made for short range war. They were designed for a naval war in the Baltic. It's very fast, but has a short range, less than half of the Harpoon. How close do we think the Americans would get to the mainland?

I'd bet if they know what's good for them, not close enough to get nailed by Sunburns from land. The Chinese navy would have to sail out to sea, and would be sunk...

 

 But how about we don't go to war at all? That's the best way to win right?

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:46 | 6139066 Counterpunch
Counterpunch's picture

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/moskit.htm

The range reported even here is on the low side. 

And you do know they can be fired from fighter bombers, right?

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 10:48 | 6139897 InvalidID
InvalidID's picture

 

 Yep, but bombers have to get close enough to fire them, and can't really.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:50 | 6137373 random999
random999's picture

Because I'm sure if the shit goes down USA wont send any backup.

Obviously the amount of aircrafts or frigates are much less relevant than the capabilities of them.

Bottom line: yes without western backup noone in the area will stand a chance against china. But in what way does it even matter? We have technology that is eighter working or not working. We have nuclears capabilities on both sides that are eighter used, not used or disabled by electronic warfare. We have societies on both sides that would turn into civil war as soon electricity is cut.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 15:55 | 6137388 goldhedge
goldhedge's picture

A lot of "USA no1" idiots replying here to the obvious.  It's a puff piece to get the sheeple ready for a massive increase in "defence" spending.  The MIC will be happy.

Your TAX $$$ hard at work LOL.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:33 | 6138361 InvalidID
InvalidID's picture

 

 +1000

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:01 | 6137415 bfellow
bfellow's picture

Comparing US capabilities to one carrier strike group is a fucking farce. B-2s out of Diego Garcia would pulverize those 'man made' islands back sand. Either the US wins or everyone loses, in a war like this.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:33 | 6138056 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

welcome ignorant dum dum .

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:01 | 6137419 Hyjinx
Hyjinx's picture

This is retarded.  It say "US carrier strike group" - that is ONE carrier strike group.  This doesn't even come close to reflecting the total size of US forces where totals are being used for the other countries.  What idiot made this comparison?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:01 | 6137420 large_wooden_badger
large_wooden_badger's picture

But NORAD has a WOPR

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:07 | 6137455 large_wooden_badger
large_wooden_badger's picture

Look, a new co-prosperity sphere!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:16 | 6137486 reader2010
reader2010's picture

China's military hardware doesn't matter much since all PLA ranks could be brought all the way from down. The recent anti-corruption movement just revealed this hidden well-known fact.  In fact 90% of promotions were done this way since 1998. The US can simply buy off the conflict. How do you expect the PLA can win?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:43 | 6137590 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

wishful thinking perhaps

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:24 | 6137789 reader2010
reader2010's picture

In China corruption is so rampant and it's in every spot of the society. When you can buy yourself from lieutenant to three-star generals,  your qualification and competence don't matter anymore. Thousands high-level officers and many more thousands middle level guys are currently under investigation and interrogation. Go figure. The reports say those who buy ranks embezzled huge amounts of the national defense budget by using fake training budgets but in reality real training never ever took place, fake construction projects, and fake hardware replacement budgets, etc.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:37 | 6138063 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

How much proof you need to admit that there is rampant corruption in ussa too . You are no longer exclusive . Everyone is part of diffrnt gang .

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:34 | 6137564 vyeung
vyeung's picture

The South China sea is about the USD. Defending the dollar. Thats all it is. DC Fascist don't want peace, don't care about free passage, dun give a rats about democracy or any of the criminal slogans. They want to protect the printing press. That is the ultimate MO!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:34 | 6137565 CHC
CHC's picture

Those 'sand castles' are literally in China's back yard.  Tell me who has the home court advantage. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:43 | 6137591 wendigo
wendigo's picture

I agree that the US navy is superior to the Chinese one, and probably the air force too. 

However, if it reaches the point where massive naval battles are taking place, both countries would plunge into total war status. The war would be long and bloody. I give the edge to China, given their greater population and superior industrial capacity. 

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 03:37 | 6139111 napper
napper's picture

US  has more large navy vessels and fighter jets than China. But can you imagine moving all of them to Asia? Astronomical expenses aside, no US commanders in their right mind would do such a thing. China's commanders would certainly hope that the entire US navy could be brought to the South China Sea, where China's land based missiles and fighter jets can exhaust and decimate US surface combatant without even involving the Chinese navy (except perhaps some subs and tiny missile boats).

 

Fighting China in the South China Sea is for big suckers.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 16:49 | 6137621 all-priced-in
all-priced-in's picture

Since the US military personnel is so much more diverse compared to China we will win easily.

 

 

 

 

 

/s/  

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:03 | 6137692 Lin S
Lin S's picture

What happens to all of the wealthy mainland Chinese immigrants flooding into CA in the event of war?  What will become of enrollment at UCLA in the event of war?  Who will buy all of the BMW's?

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:25 | 6139046 napper
napper's picture

Their bank accounts will be frozen. Their properties will be confiscated. They will be rounded up and sent to concentration camps.

 

That's what will happen.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:04 | 6137701 madashellron
madashellron's picture

Looks like the 700 Billion the U.S. is spending on defense this year is going to good use.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:19 | 6137748 NoWayJose
NoWayJose's picture

This won't be a ship-to-ship war. It will be a missile based war (see the Falklands history). US capabilities are much better than China's but China gets to cover that area with all manner of land based aircraft and land based missiles. The Chinese will splash any planes entering their own 'no fly zone'. Thus for any action to happen the US has to start it by sending in a plane. Then it is the US turn to escalate - or not. We might drop some missiles onto those islands, but it's hard to sink an island. I doubt Obama is ready to launch missiles onto the Chinese mainland. And I doubt the Chinese will send anything except HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of anti-ship missiles at the carrier group. How many anti-missile missiles do we carry on board before we have to withdraw?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:28 | 6137820 Crocodile
Crocodile's picture

The Sunburn and Onyx missiles are far superior to the US; why do you think we scraped sending supplies to the space station and rely on Russia, China's best friend, and soon Germany will be joining.  Wave the Red, White and Blue while you can because the US is being taken down from inside on many fronts (financial particularly) and the US Military has their enemies backward (start with the pentagon & D.C.).  The hope is they come to realize they are destroying their futures and their children's future and the nation before it is too late, which is appears to be.  We have not been engaged in a war based on the guidelines laid out in the Constitution in our lifetimes and the oath taken by all from the Commander in Chief to the private has not been followed in our lifetime.  Freedom, we have never had that; just look at the actual definition, which no one ever does...we have liberties and those are becoming more scarce by the day.  I am thankful to be born in the US, since I had no say in the issue, but we are headed down the moral sewer.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:15 | 6137761 nostromo17
nostromo17's picture

This article is stupid. You are comparing ALL of China's one aircraft carrier column to ONE U.S. Carrier Strike Group.

WHAT THE HELL?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:19 | 6137786 Crocodile
Crocodile's picture

Well given the US has 700 plus military installations across the globe; I'd say we are stretched a little...I smell a "Draft" coming soon planted deep within some appropriations bill that has nothing to do with military.  My kids will not be fighting for the globalists..Lord willing!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:49 | 6137894 css1971
css1971's picture

Cannons were to castles what _____________________ are to aircraft carriers.

 

Aircraft carriers are obsolete. It'll obviously take the deaths of thousands before anyone believes it though.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 03:18 | 6139094 napper
napper's picture

I think the author might have accidentally plugged in the post-war numbers. Before the war with China, there are 10 operational carrier groups; after the war, only 1 operational carrier group remains. 3 carriers if you count the 2 under maintenance.

 

Seriously, I don't believe there will be a shooting war between the US and China.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:18 | 6137772 Counterpunch
Counterpunch's picture

Will the same brilliant neocon minds, chickenhawk Zionist armchair warriors who had no military or intelligence experience

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-26/key-iraq-war-architect-%E2%80%9...

be planning this assault as well?

 

I suppose one way for the navy to get a huge budget is for it to lose a handful of carriers and destroyers to subs and sunburns.

 

Maybe one of Israel's subs could get the thing started, are we keeping track of them?

 

 

Whym I bet that most of the chinese military will melt away, then greet us as liberators, and our unsinkable aircraft carriers will launch F-35s that will make the Chinese believe we all have 12 inch cocks.

 

If I were a navy man, I'd wonder what Israel may have sold China lately, as Israel eyes its next host...

 

 

Here's the thing, folks:   Israel is China's second-largest arms supplier (the first being Russia).The chances that the Israelis would stab America in the back, too, is higher than I'd like were I on a boat 40 miles off the coast of Shanghai in another needless, pointless military operation for Uncle ZOG.

 

[parenthetically, as contrast, here's typical Israeli hypocrisy: 

Benjamin Netanyahu to Putin: S-300 missile sale to Iran ...

the S-300 is a defensive missile which would only hinder USraelian ability to freely navigate the skies above the sovereign nation of Iran to bomb its nuclear energy facilities and a few government offices and command and control locations along the way.

 

 


Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:18 | 6137777 nostromo17
nostromo17's picture

IS THERE AN EdiTOR working here. How does this crap get put up.

What a load of shit. IS EVERYTHING HERE COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT LIKE THIS "ARTICLE"

Infographic my ass.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:18 | 6137778 richsob
richsob's picture

If the Chinese find themselves in this kind of war they better understand they will have just received the last drop of oil they're going to get from the Middle East.  All we have to do is shut down all oil shipments to China through the Straits of Malaysia and it's checkmate.  Everybody gets their oil; China, no.....sorry you don't get any.  There are nearly a dozen countries who would be delighted to help the U.S. Navy do this to knock the Chinese down a peg.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:25 | 6137808 Circle of DNA
Circle of DNA's picture

Well Russia can easily step in and substitude any Middle Eastern oil supplier.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:43 | 6137875 richsob
richsob's picture

They could if they have a few years to build the pipeline which doesn't exist today for Russia to supply China with sufficient oil to replace their Middle Eastern imports.  And since the proposed pipeline goes through territory where there is a lot of anti-Han feelings there "might" be some "accidents" happen while they tried to construct it.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:01 | 6138145 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

sorry sob you are highly misinformed . Chinese firstly have plenty oil reserves with themselves and you cant obtain any advantage in blocking malaca straits as chinese have bypassed it already by building a pipeline via myanmar to china . Russian Chinese pipeline will become operational by next year or maybe it has started suplies (crosscheck that ) . apart from that Turkmenistan supplies to china already and soon china will build its iran-pak pipeline too ( you can drop this pipeline for time being .) so yankees dont have the same advantage of blocking oil suplies once they had against japan island . 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:12 | 6138171 richsob
richsob's picture

You're letting your politics get in the way of your reasoning.  China is the single greatest purchaser of Middle Eastern oil.  Period.  Why?  Because they need it.  Badly.....especially if they were trying to run a war machine.  Why do you think they're trying to corner the oil reserves in the South China Sea in the first place?  It's for this reason I think they'd back down right now if things got too hot.  Maybe later when they have other reliable sources of crude oil in sufficient quanities that wouldn't be such a big consideration.  As for their domestic production, they are having a hell of a time maintaining production right now.  Their oil technology is lacking right now. 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:38 | 6138222 Max Steel
Max Steel's picture

eh ? its a logical reasoning only that russia will provide oil support to China in wartime . Japs didnt get such hrlp from soviet because they waged the war against soviets too . US also import a lot of oil from M.E and venezuela .  You cant play the same ww2 trick card against China which yanks played aganst japs . It aint politics its the truth . There is a reason why Chinese have good relations with russia . BRICS ever heard of it ?  Yanks can take canadian aid in such situation but unlike yankees other are not warmongering pricks . japan is an island nation sharing no territories but China is .

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:55 | 6138571 NoWayJose
NoWayJose's picture

Where do you think the Chinese get their oil? From our friends in Iran and Saudi Arabia. How do we stop an Iranian tanker from going to China - without starting WWIII? And with the Saudis playing the oil game to get market share - guess what -- China is their biggest customer. So we block Saudi oil? Sure...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:25 | 6137806 tony wilson and...
tony wilson and saturn zion devils's picture

 for
the spratley isle
for them
your kids must die
it is written in the talmoo
that the sprach lie islands
are israhells

come on guys
marines grunts and all
even you fella with flat feet
we can do this
they are only chink
no stamina for the fight

in 2 weeks we girls can bee in beige ging
for shoppings
cum on gay goy loser
stop sitting in your underpants torn knickers
put down your donut faggot
put away your battered broken meat
saddle up brokeback
cowboys here ho's
we are ameriguns sea
like flight 93
fantasy
lets roll
cum on
useless eaters
lets do it for the gipper and for the 911 dancing israelite
 listen scum
it is talmudick  written
you must die
for the banker rabbi
and saturn
not forgeting the vital spratlys
and why not
already

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:31 | 6137825 chistletoe
chistletoe's picture

you might wish to familiarize yourself just a little bit with the complex and arcane laws governing the drawing of national borders out in the oceans and the rights and priviledges thereby granted unto the nation in question ... pay particular attention to the effects which "habitable" islands play upon such borders ... and also pay particular attention to the extensions, first ratified under Reagan's administration, of the economic enterprise zones located within two hundred miles of any such "habitable island", and you might also do a little research on the known  possibility of large oil fields existing underneath the South China Sea ... if you study long and hard, I believe that after burning a few pints of midnight oil, all of this will become a bit more clear to you ....

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:39 | 6137857 Counterpunch
Counterpunch's picture

There's also a number of laws against wars of aggression, or transferring populations, targeting civilian infrastructure, etc.  Geneva Conventions amongst others.

The US and Israel are the heavy and middleweight champs in broadly ignoring international law, but summoning it when convenient.

The truth of the matter is international waters or not, the United States has no business 50 miles off the coast of Iran, or China, or Russia, and it is decades of hyperinterventionist horseshit that has convinced unthinking people all over the country that the US military is supposed to operate like the Anglo-Zionist Banking and WArfare Empire's Legions instead of a force to protect these shores and vital US national security interests.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:05 | 6138159 Charming Anarchist
Charming Anarchist's picture

Laws? 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:36 | 6137849 SquadronVBF94
SquadronVBF94's picture

The notion that the US would only deploy a single carrier group is absurd.  So is the notion that the chicoms would be able to deploy the full weight of their forces in the Spratly Islands.  Clearly the seek to extend an air umbrella over the oil fields of north Borneo for which they would be desperate to control should they be cut off from the ME supplies.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:37 | 6137853 Tarshatha
Tarshatha's picture

fear, fear and more moar fear,

you must be afraid or the paradigm will collapse.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:47 | 6137883 Super Hans
Super Hans's picture

My response to a post was either deleted or not posted based on what? My post was well thought out and written in literate English, and it adhered to the TOU. What is up?

 

SH

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:19 | 6138324 dsty
dsty's picture

It did not stand up to the high standards set by Toni Wilson and those like minded

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 17:53 | 6137913 Ginsengbull
Ginsengbull's picture

USA won't even be involved.

 

Look at the numbers.

 

Japan could dust the chicoms all by themselves.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:05 | 6137953 tarabel
tarabel's picture

 

 

Japan is certainly ramping up and has a lot of very capable equipment in inventory and on the building ways.

And, frankly, the Jewish overlords that rule the country (according to some people) are obviously using tension with China to revive Japanese nationalism and distract from the country's domestic problems. A fight over the Senkakus seem to offer a high probability for initiating conflict that can then spread.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:54 | 6138121 Dickweed Wang
Dickweed Wang's picture

Japan could dust the chicoms all by themselves.

You forgot the /sarc tag, right?  If not, you are seriously deluded my friend.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 01:09 | 6138973 bid the soldier...
bid the soldiers shoot's picture

seriously deluded

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:22 | 6139044 napper
napper's picture

Ginsengbull is probably just an unemployed troll.

 

He and InvalidID are resident spammers of trolling posts.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 20:05 | 6141915 bid the soldier...
bid the soldiers shoot's picture

You still smokin Angel Dust, dude?  Very cool.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:24 | 6138031 steelrules
steelrules's picture

Lets not forget there's a mutual defence pact between China Russia and Iran. If this thing goes hot War will come to Europe Asia and the Persian Gulf all at once. Anyone that thinks it will just be China vs Japan and the US is not seeing the whole chess board.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:27 | 6138042 GreatUncle
GreatUncle's picture

Stuff the power game.

Trying to figure out if man made sancastles are better or worse than fiat QE 80 billion a month bubbles.

Fuck it .. dunno .. probably both are as bad as each other because in both cases China does not have the asset backed vakue to build those islands but the USA is as bad because it flogged all its assets already.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:27 | 6138043 Limbs Akimbo
Limbs Akimbo's picture

 

The U.S. has had a loooooong time to militarize space. A very long time.

I'd seriously opin that the U.S. has all sorts of asymetrical hardware we have not heard about.

This looks just like a 'OH MY GOD! THE COMMIES ARE COMING' from the previous decades to drive funding for....politicians...ultimately.

 

But once again, in such puff pieces as this, no mention of the loss of humanity or the wreckage of lives in the aftermath.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:37 | 6138061 nuke ISIS now
nuke ISIS now's picture

More H promotion of untrue propagnda

 

Lets view the ranking of the world's military, shall we:

 

US #1 IN FIREPOWER BY FAR, IT IS NOT EVEN A QUESTION

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:51 | 6138113 Dickweed Wang
Dickweed Wang's picture

US #1 IN FIREPOWER BY FAR, IT IS NOT EVEN A QUESTION

That may be but when you are outnumbered by a bomber/aircraft ratio of 2100 to 50 I don't care how good your firepower is.  This is the same tactic that the Chinese used in the Korean war - outnumber your opponent with sheer volume of personnel and equipment, even if the overall quality and technology is not as good and the outcome is almost assured.  Let's see a US aircraft carrier fend off 500 missiles at one time . . . . .

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:16 | 6138234 nuke ISIS now
nuke ISIS now's picture

I believe you need to reiew those numbers Dickweed, you vaunted Chinese Navy has a TOTAL of ONE, yes ONE Aircrap carrier...LOL

Seriously? you have the balls to write that, when China stole everything it has from the U.S.?  Oh yeah great fucking think tank China is..fucking thieving fucks..and that shit is geting shut down right quick, then what will China have? its dick in its hand and that about it

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:48 | 6138550 NoWayJose
NoWayJose's picture

The battle is not between carrier groups. No matter how much armament the US has it cannot sink mainland China. And any serious attack on mainland China will not occur because US leaders are too weak.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:57 | 6138125 steelrules
steelrules's picture

It matters little who has more of this or more of that, in the end any nation that thinks it can not win will use the Samson Option. You will kill yourself but you will take your enemy with you.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:15 | 6138175 besnook
besnook's picture

best sarcasm of the day!

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 23:50 | 6142573 napper
napper's picture

He has been watching too  much CNN, Fox, NYTimes, Washington Posts and reading too much US military fanboy mags and sites.

 

Completely misinformed.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:38 | 6138068 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

Yep, God knows where the infamous missing pentagon $trillons went and just what all the secret shuttle missions put into orbit up there.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:43 | 6138078 SMC
SMC's picture

Peeping Tom devices and allegedly a whole lot of garbage that does not work.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:17 | 6139036 napper
napper's picture

God doesn't know. You know. At least you should be able to take a good educated guess. Be brutally honest with yourself.

 

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:42 | 6138080 studfinder
studfinder's picture

China could just shut down exports to the US.  Could you imagine the FSA when WalMart shelves are empty?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:43 | 6138081 22winmag
22winmag's picture

Was the high-altitude air burst over Kansas all priced in?

 

Faraday cages are your friend.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:52 | 6138259 djsmps
djsmps's picture

I assume you don't like to eat bread.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 18:45 | 6138095 Dickweed Wang
Dickweed Wang's picture

Boom Boom Boom . . . . out go the lights.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:08 | 6138164 where_is the_nuke
where_is the_nuke's picture

I hope Russia and China have defence treaty. In case of Uncle Sam attacks Russia should nuke the shit out of Uncle Sam and Israel. Let's see what those Ziocunts can do.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:16 | 6138179 besnook
besnook's picture

just buy pms, copper, oil and concubines and you will be free for life in less than 5 years.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:20 | 6138188 Onlygold1
Onlygold1's picture

It's all Bullshit

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:29 | 6138190 essence
essence's picture

Leaving aside NWO agenda & stuff for the moment, if push came to shove, and sovereigns really were going all out against another, the wild card is space based weapons (and other, advanced weaponry).

Who holds the upper hand there? I haven't the foggiest  notion seeing as they're so secretive about that subject matter.  Any ZH posters (or Tylers) think they're conversive in that regard?

In other words, don't post destroyer numbers et al , that's the last war.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:24 | 6138192 The Darwin Mode
The Darwin Mode's picture

I despise America's imperial wars of aggression that threaten national security as much as the next true citizen, but this infographic is nonsense. I was a Korean linguist in the USAF and an "analyst" at NSA, and any of us could have told you that North Korea boasted more vessels than the US Navy. But do you really think that dozens and dozens of dinghies, junks, and fishing trawlers could collectively pose a legitimate threat to a single American carrier battle group?

Quantity may be a quality of its own, but there is a limit to numerical advantage. Messing with China over this Spratly thing would be dangerous for many reasons, but the military advantage implied by this infographic is ridiculous. China's Kuznetsov is not to be disregarded, but the scale and capability of its combined air wing and armaments is nowhere near that of even our more aged Nimitz-class carriers.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:44 | 6138542 NoWayJose
NoWayJose's picture

The fight is not in the middle of the Pacific. It is in China's bathtub! Do you really think there will be any US carrier in range of land based Chinese aircraft and missiles?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:31 | 6138209 dag
dag's picture

China has a serious Achilles heal - Three Gorges.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:38 | 6138223 luna_man
luna_man's picture

 

 

Just curious, how many of these war machines, are battle ready?...Of any of the above five countries.

 

paging  "Jack Burton"

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:38 | 6138224 patb
patb's picture

There are two issues

 

1) The chinese can grind out a lot of missiles.  Silkworms, D-21, etc...A wave of missiles coming in could mess up the defensive ECM.

 

2) Cyber war could change a lot of things.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:44 | 6138240 Karaio
Karaio's picture

"Tabarel" & others:

They need to better understand the Chinese!

http://thesaker.is/saker-interview-with-jeff-j-brown/

hehe!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 19:58 | 6138271 Ghostmaker
Ghostmaker's picture

Great being back to pre world war II levels in the usa isn't it?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:05 | 6138297 Quantum Nucleonics
Quantum Nucleonics's picture

ZH is at its worst when it tries to sound smart on defense policy. Just sad, stick to finance.

Just one of many inaccuracies... Your comparing China's entire aircraft inventory to a carrier air wing, but most of those fighters are legacy assets with limited modern capabilities and no where near the combat radius to do anything useful.

Sad, just pathetic.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:21 | 6138327 dsty
dsty's picture

don't even try to interupt us with the facts!

we're not into that!

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:40 | 6138529 NoWayJose
NoWayJose's picture

A Sopwith Camel can carry an anti ship missile and fire it from 25 miles away. The first 500 or so will get stopped by the US anti-missile defenses. But what happens when the US runs out of ammo and anti-missile missiles?

The Chinese missile factories can have unlimited numbers of workers, all the resources and materials needed, and are 300 miles from the fighting. The US re-supply is limited to what is stored in the Pacific. Re-stocking requires months.

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:28 | 6138331 FiendNCheeses
FiendNCheeses's picture

Initial numbers at the onset of conflict aren't enough to determine who'd win in a war. I think the more important factors are the willingness to fight, costs and the ability to quickly replace all the ships, aircraft and armor that would inevitably be destroyed either in combat or accidents. The fact is, our stuff simply costs too much and takes too long to make.

At $300 million per F-35, $13 billion per aircraft carrier, $2 billion per B-2 bomber or $2 billion for a single destroyer, how many can we afford to replace, especially when the missiles used to blow them up rarely miss and only cost $500,000?

Build and repair times are a factor, too. The aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford was laid down in 2009 and won't be commissioned until 2016 at the earliest (7 years) and the $2 billion B-2 bomber 'Spirit of Washington' was out of commission for four years after a minor engine fire on the ground at Anderson Field in Guam.

Our success in WWII was due largely to our ability to mass produce huge amounts of equipment and do it on the cheap. Those days are long gone. Back then, we built jeeps by the thousands for about $800 each. Today, we can't even produce an airplane toilet seat for less than $800.

The Chinese and Russians, on the other hand, can pump out jets, ships, armor and missiles in a fraction of the time it takes us, and they can do it for far less. Also, there's no shortage of Chinese and Russian soldiers who would be willing to die for the glory of the Motherland. We, however, would balk as soon as the first body bags started coming home.

I cringe every time I hear someone boasting of our military might. That kind of self-aggrandizing talk is dangerous and leads to stupid foreign policy moves by politicians who are dumb enough to believe we're invulnerable. I hate to say it, but if it came down to a war between us and China and/or Russia, we'd probably lose.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:44 | 6138539 squid
squid's picture

The Phlips will open Clark to the USAF, the Navy won't have to do much.

 

The chinese are fucked and they know it. I wonder what they are really after here....taiwan?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 23:01 | 6138766 FiendNCheeses
FiendNCheeses's picture

You're assuming the Philippines would allow the use of Clark AFB for an attack on China. But even if they did, it's unlikely Clark would exist 30 minutes after hostilities began.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 03:08 | 6139087 napper
napper's picture

Exactly. The Philippines rely far more on China than America for their economic well being. In addition, many Filipinos harbor strong resentment of the US, who had once tried to colonize the Philippines.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:11 | 6139029 napper
napper's picture

I don't think leaders of the Philippines are that dumb. If they let the US use Clark, the base will be among the first to be destroyed in a shooting war. The US is not going to pay for the damages.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 02:17 | 6139037 FiendNCheeses
FiendNCheeses's picture

On top of that, after hostilities ended and assuming the US was cleared out of the South Pacific for good, the Phillippines would be left to deal with their new arch enemy, China, alone.

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 09:25 | 6139552 Skiprrrdog
Skiprrrdog's picture

No probably about it...they would beat us like a red headed step-child. And all our shit is made in China... who are we going to call in the middle of a war with them when we need moar war shit?

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 20:55 | 6142058 FiendNCheeses
FiendNCheeses's picture

Walmart?

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:23 | 6138333 Rock On Roger
Rock On Roger's picture

I see lots of american pride,

 

Before the Fall.

 

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.ca/2012/10/how-it-could-happen-part-o...

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 20:32 | 6138337 besnook
besnook's picture

most of this speculation is way off base. china has always been defensive minded. the only empire they wish to establish is with the yuan. as they always have, the chinese colonize with money and people in a soft way, like a drug dealer addicting his customer with the lure of a good nod. god knows the chinese love a good nod. mind you, with all this talk about everyone in the region hating the barbaric japs(whores for the troops! the horror!!!), everyone including russia and india fear the chinese more. they are all afraid they will succumb to the addiction that allows china to dictate their politics and economy without lifting a finger, as they always have, literally. the only other comparable enemy is the usa because they realize it is the same damn thing as it ever was, only white people are really obnoxious. the chinese are pretty even tempered. you'll know when you fuck up and end up at target practice.

the usa military strategy is as loony as it was pre ww2. containing japan was relatively easy even with the contemporary weapons but couldn't be done without a massive assault with massive machinery against a tiny water bound country full of lilliputions with neat cosmetic surgery. any land attack on china is insane, especially with russia pumping oil and gas directly to them. a naval battle is useless, like sinking the coast guard fleet. so what if china is exposed if the land trail is open to india and the stans. it may be more difficult to supply a population of 1.3 billion people but it is 1.3 billion people. 100,000 dead chinese here and there is just collateral damage. a nuke war is stupid with that reason also being the reason it might be deployed.

besides, navies are sitting ducks nowadays, the falklands war and the exocet(sp) missile ended the navy rules the waves story. subs are still useful until they fire a missile. armies are only good for policing the population. drones are where its at. thousands at a time, like ww2 b24 raids on germany. em attacks and electronic mind control will highlight the next "war".

any military confrontation with china is sure defeat for the usa, a country that can't beat pajama or blanket wearing foes. do you really think they can beat a properly dressed military? one with a draft that taps a pool of several hundred million men and women(there's feminism in china) armed with aks straight from the orient express, moscow to peking segment? 

the usa has lost its mind. this will end badly for everyone. the only consolation is the western .1% will get spanked pretty hard.

 

Wed, 05/27/2015 - 21:42 | 6138534 squid
squid's picture

Whilst I agree "partly" with what you say, you need to understand the ridiculousness of what china claims.

See this map:

http://blogs.voanews.com/state-department-news/files/2012/07/BB-South-Ch...

 

They say everything inside that red line is Chinese. That, in and of itself, is a provocation to any country on earth that has merchant shipping that passes through the South China Sea, not to mention the absurd territorial claims.

 

China is wrong on this one, VERY wrong. Who do you think Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Brunei, Japan, Philippines and Indonesia will side with here?

 

The Chinese have fucked up here, this is a huge gamble and you don't bluff unless you're prepared for it to be called. And its going to be called.

 

The Chinese need to back off or this will be war.

 

It would be nice if a cyclone would just pass through there and con-sine those islands back to the seabed whence they came.

 

This is NOT good.

 

Squid.

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