Jump to content
Nevada Convert

China’s Huge Advantage In a Naval Battle With the US.

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Nevada Convert said:

If our ships come within 540 km of there’s, we can get hit. We have to get within 240 km to hit them. The US has more fire power, but it doesn’t do us any good if we’re out of our range. This is obviously unacceptable, and luckily with the Trump increase in defense spending, big problems such as this are being fixed. This is the kind of thing that a Dem prez would, most likely, blow off and the press would ignore the problem. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-warship-range-could-be-decisive-in-battle-against-us-navy-2019-4

Hey, if there is one thing we can always spend more money on it is the military.  What's up with all that spending on education, transportation, health, housing, food and agriculture, energy, etc?  That slice of blue pie is too small.

Image result for us discretionary spending

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mugtang said:

China only has 300 nuclear weapons.  If we got into a war with China it would largely be conventional as long as we didn’t invade China (which would be a terrible strategy anyway) or seek regime change.  So it would really be a naval war and we would wipe the floor (seas?) with them. 

How do we know they only have 300 weapons of mass destruction? Seems like we’ve been down this road before?...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NevadaFan said:

How do we know they only have 300 weapons of mass destruction? Seems like we’ve been down this road before?...

https://www.nti.org/learn/countries/china/

Quote

China closely guards information about its nuclear arsenal, making estimation unusually difficult. However, China has approximately 290 nuclear warheads. [5] The U.S. Department of Defense asserts that China has approximately 90 nuclear-capable ICBMs, and four operational JIN-class (Type 094) nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN)with two more under construction, all of which carry the JL-2 submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM). [6]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, alum93 said:

Hey, if there is one thing we can always spend more money on it is the military.  What's up with all that spending on education, transportation, health, housing, food and agriculture, energy, etc?  That slice of blue pie is too small.

Image result for us discretionary spending

Bogus stat.  Vast majority of education spending is done by the states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CPslograd said:

Bogus stat.  Vast majority of education spending is done by the states.

And it's a terrible system, basing the quality of education on property values.  Why don't we just say "we want to keep the poor, poor"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bsu_alum9 said:

image.png

Another bogus stat.

Nominal dollars isn't useful in comparing defense spending.  Has to be done in PPP, and even then its not perfect.

What's is the salary of a PLAN infantry man, versus an American?

What is the cost for an American shipyard to build a ship versus the far larger and more efficient Chinese yards.

I'm not advocating more defense spending, or making the Chinese out to be more than they are.  But cherry picking the nominal dollars defense spending stat is very misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CPslograd said:

Another bogus stat.

Nominal dollars isn't useful in comparing defense spending.  Has to be done in PPP, and even then its not perfect.

What's is the salary of a PLAN infantry man, versus an American?

What is the cost for an American shipyard to build a ship versus the far larger and more efficient Chinese yards.

I'm not advocating more defense spending, or making the Chinese out to be more than they are.  But cherry picking the nominal dollars defense spending stat is very misleading.

That's why I posted a list of military equipment?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_level_of_military_equipment

Even that is misleading because there are technological differences between our equipment and theirs, so not an apples to apples comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mugtang said:

There’s not a navy in the world that could take on our Navy. The combined forces of the Russian and Chinese navies couldn’t do significant damage to our Navy unless they wanted to drop nukes everywhere. 

I’m not concerned about the weapons distance difference.  China is developing missiles, we’re developing lasers and railguns.  

China’s carrier killer relies on a long kill chain that’s unreliable.  If China decided to try and sink a carrier they would be opening a huge can of worms.  

Russia could take out our surface fleet in 10 seconds.  All those aircraft carriers and men dead the first 10 seconds of the war.   Not even a question, they have zero chance.

China, North Korea and many other nations have the same ability.  

Anyone who can put a submarine under our forces with a nuclear tipped torpedo can do this.   Russia has one under ever carrier group all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

Russia could take out our surface fleet in 10 seconds.  All those aircraft carriers and men dead the first 10 seconds of the war.   Not even a question, they have zero chance.

China, North Korea and many other nations have the same ability.  

Anyone who can put a submarine under our forces with a nuclear tipped torpedo can do this.   Russia has one under ever carrier group all the time.

Yes by using nuclear weapons they could.  I said that in my post.  But if they use nuclear weapons, then we will respond with nuclear weapons and that’s game over for everybody.  

And Russia very well could have submarines under our carrier groups.  I’m sure our subs are following those subs too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Yes by using nuclear weapons they could.  I said that in my post.  But if they use nuclear weapons, then we will respond with nuclear weapons and that’s game over for everybody.  

And Russia very well could have submarines under our carrier groups.  I’m sure our subs are following those subs too. 

In a real war they will use real weapons.   

We aren't going to be fighting some tinhorn 3rd world shithole where all those obsolete WWII style weapons will work like @Nevada Convert thinks.

A real war against real opposition will certainly have space weapons, nuclear weapons and all kinds of things unexpected being used.   Surface naval fleets are antiques and not something that will be useful in a real war other than as large coffins.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, alum93 said:

Hey, if there is one thing we can always spend more money on it is the military.  What's up with all that spending on education, transportation, health, housing, food and agriculture, energy, etc?  That slice of blue pie is too small.

Image result for us discretionary spending

Seems a little low. with some effort we can increase that slice of the pie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

Russia could take out our surface fleet in 10 seconds.  All those aircraft carriers and men dead the first 10 seconds of the war.   Not even a question, they have zero chance.

China, North Korea and many other nations have the same ability.  

Anyone who can put a submarine under our forces with a nuclear tipped torpedo can do this.   Russia has one under ever carrier group all the time.

nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

Seems a little low. with some effort we can increase that slice of the pie.

It does.  $30B for science?  Trump goes with his gut.  That's a quote.  Veteran's benefits?  We already used their bodies and minds.  Energy and Environment?  LOL,  we have an oil lobbyist fixing that.  Health?  Transportation?  Every man for himself.  That pie can easily be 80%.  Plus all those programs are for socialists anyway.  And we all know socialism is evil.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

In a real war they will use real weapons.   

We aren't going to be fighting some tinhorn 3rd world shithole where all those obsolete WWII style weapons will work like @Nevada Convert thinks.

A real war against real opposition will certainly have space weapons, nuclear weapons and all kinds of things unexpected being used.   Surface naval fleets are antiques and not something that will be useful in a real war other than as large coffins.

As always, your analysis is wrong and based on fantasy.

In the real world, thank God, real generals are deciding what real weapons they need to fight all kinds of different real conflicts and real wars and of various real magnitudes. 

BlewMules, I think I’ll defer to the real experts in the military that exercise real knowledge and real common sense that you are completely lacking. 😂🤪🤪😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, alum93 said:

It does.  $30B for science?  Trump goes with his gut.  That's a quote.  Veteran's benefits?  We already used their bodies and minds.  Energy and Environment?  LOL,  we have an oil lobbyist fixing that.  Health?  Transportation?  Every man for himself.  That pie can easily be 80%.  Plus all those programs are for socialists anyway.  And we all know socialism is evil.  

Our ability to kill people and break things is foundational.  Everything else stems from that.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that said, I DISAGREE with the central thesis of the OP; that the Chinese Navy represents some sort of existential threat.

The Russians for all intents and purposes have NO blue water capability to speak of and every year that passes their capabilities diminish as its equipment ages and falls into disrepair

You can combine all of the Navies on planet earth and we outgun them, in terms of numbers, capability, technology, doctrine and LOGISTICS.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×