Toronto Escorts

China 'training for strikes' on US targets

Charlemagne

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2017
15,451
2,484
113
China 'training for strikes' on US targets

17 August 2018

China's military "is likely training for strikes" against US and allied targets in the Pacific, a Pentagon report warns.

The annual report to Congress says China is increasing its ability to send bomber planes further afield.

The report highlights its increasing military capability, including defence spending estimated at $190bn (£150bn) - a third that of the US.

China has not yet commented on the report.

What else does the report say?

The warning about air strikes is one part of a comprehensive assessment of China's military and economic ambitions.

"Over the last three years, the PLA [People's Liberation Army] has rapidly expanded its overwater bomber operating areas, gaining experience in critical maritime regions and likely training for strikes against US and allied targets," the report says.

It goes on to say it is not clear what China is trying to prove by such flights.

The PLA may demonstrate the "capability to strike US and allied forces and military bases in the western Pacific Ocean, including Guam," the report adds.

China, it says, is restructuring its ground forces to "fight and win".

"The purpose of these reforms is to create a more mobile, modular, lethal ground force capable of being the core of joint operations," the report says.

China's military budget is expected to expand to $240bn over the next 10 years, according to the assessment.

It also highlights China's growing space programme "despite its public stance against the militarization of space".

In June, President Donald Trump announced his intentions to set up a sixth branch of the US armed forces - a "space force".

Why is Trump creating a space force?Where are the areas of tension?

The US is concerned about China's growing influence in the Pacific, where Washington still plays a major role.

One of the most high-profile areas is the South China Sea, much of it claimed by China and other countries.

Media captionA BBC team flew over the disputed South China Sea islands in a US military plane.

The US military regularly seeks to demonstrate freedom of navigation by flying over the South China Sea.

China has been expanding what appear to be military facilities on islands and reefs in the area, and it has landed bombers on the outposts during training exercises.

Another flashpoint is Taiwan, which is seen by China as a breakaway province.

The document warns that China "is likely preparing for a contingency to unify Taiwan with China by force".

"Should the United States intervene, China would try to delay effective intervention and seek victory in a high-intensity, limited war of short duration," the report says.

In a nod to China, the US cut formal ties with Taiwan in 1979 but continues to maintain close political and security ties, which irks Beijing.

Trump lays out hike in military spendingWhy is the South China Sea contentious?

The US also continues to maintain a substantial military presence in Japan, which has its own territorial disputes with China and the Philippines.

Tensions also continue in the non-military sphere. The US and China have announced tariffs on a range of each other's goods.

The rise of the maritime militia

By Jonathan Marcus, Defence and Diplomatic Correspondent

While the bulk of the Pentagon's annual China report focuses on Beijing's rapidly developing military capabilities, the study also looks in some depth at China's little known Maritime Militia.

This is an armed civilian reserve force, organised and recruited locally, but according to the Pentagon, the Militia plays a vital role in the South China Sea, spreading Beijing's political goals through operations short of outright war.

A large number of Militia vessels support the Chinese Navy and Coast Guard in safeguarding maritime claims, protecting fisheries and so on.

The Pentagon study says that the Militia has played a significant role in a number of high-profile incidents, where Chinese vessels have sought to coerce ships from countries with competing maritime claims.

This is all part of China's effort to promote so-called "grey operations", designed to frustrate the response of other parties involved and secure its interests across a wide swathe of reefs and island chains.

What is being done to defuse tensions?

The Pentagon report is at pains to stress that the US "seeks a constructive and results-oriented relationship with China".

There is regular contact between US and Chinese military officials.

And in June, James Mattis became the first US defence secretary to visit China since 2014.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45218741
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
China landed long range bombers on their artificial islands in the South China Sea earlier this year. It’s only a matter of time before they put missile installations and refuelling depots there too. All done in increments over years.

The US trains for strikes anywhere in the world. So do the Russians, and any other major power.

Hell, with Trump as President the US is probably dusting off old invasion scenarios for Canada or at the very least how to secure and close off the border.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Army trains for potential enemies? Wow. That's a surprise.
Exactly.

I’m sure the Pentagon has plenty of plans to take out that island if required -how many cruise missle would it take?
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,447
1,331
113
Since the islands are disputed and in international waters I don't know why the US just does not build its own island there since it seems so peeved by the Chinese islands.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
Exactly.

I’m sure the Pentagon has plenty of plans to take out that island if required -how many cruise missle would it take?
Take out those Chinese islands, the Americans better be prepared for Guam being taken out.

China used incrementalism to get where they are. These islands have been a controversy for years, but nothing was done except some naval and sail past exercises. But bucket by bucket, China thumbed their noses and built these islands with a "fuck you" to any objections. And nothing was done. Now, if something were done who would be considered the provocateur?
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,778
113
Exactly.

I’m sure the Pentagon has plenty of plans to take out that island if required -how many cruise missle would it take?
The US military never shoot at anybody that can shoot back.
 

Polaris

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2007
3,076
58
48
hornyville
Since the islands are disputed and in international waters I don't know why the US just does not build its own island there since it seems so peeved by the Chinese islands.
They do not have that kind of tech.

The Americans did expand Guam over the years.
 

Promo

Active member
Jan 10, 2009
2,480
0
36
Exactly.

I’m sure the Pentagon has plenty of plans to take out that island if required -how many cruise missle would it take?
How many? All of them! Better use them or lose them, because any Navy platform involved, won't exist 20 minutes later.

essguy has it right.

This is going to have to be dealt with through negotiation with a weaker US position.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Since the islands are disputed and in international waters I don't know why the US just does not build its own island there since it seems so peeved by the Chinese islands.
We have 19 of those, they are called aircraft carriers, they are mobile and extraordinarily well armed.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
How many? All of them! Better use them or lose them, because any Navy platform involved, won't exist 20 minutes later.

essguy has it right.

This is going to have to be dealt with through negotiation with a weaker US position.
China would be dreaming if they thought they could eliminate the Pacific fleet and B2s in 20 minutes. Any single sub or B2 could take out that island.
 

Promo

Active member
Jan 10, 2009
2,480
0
36
We have 19 of those, they are called aircraft carriers, they are mobile and extraordinarily well armed.
19 - really? The US currently has 10 (11) operational active carriers with 2 under construction (delivery is many years out). The Ford hasn't completed work-up yet, although it is launched and commissioned. Usually 4-5 carriers max are deployed at sea. A record 7 were at sea in 2017, but 2 of those were in transit to port at the time.

Are you trying to claim amphibious assault ships as carriers? Even the USN doesn't call them carriers. Their aircraft loads are optimized to suit their designed amphibious warfare role and can't carry modern air superiority, AWACS and ground attack role aircraft. Once the F35 problems are sorted out, I would agree they could be considered mini-carriers or light carriers, but the F35 can't support the best AA missiles currently in US inventory or under design thus would be questionable against current and next-gen ground-based air superiority aircraft especially if those aircraft are supported by AWACS or EW assets. The amphibious assault ships have to get closer to their targets and are therefore at more risk.

Carriers don't count as soverign territory as defined by the UN. Even if the Nimitz dropped anchor in the middle of the South China sea, no claims could be made. And it would be an easy target.

If you've been studying ....... the US has moved it's 2 Pacific carriers further from China in early 2018. Previously they routinely patrolled ~200-250 miles off-shore, now they are patrolling 350-500 miles offshore and have upped their battlefleet capability with an addition of an Aegis cruiser or destroyer equipped in a dedicated anti-aircraft load-out (including ABM to piss off the Russians).
 

Promo

Active member
Jan 10, 2009
2,480
0
36
China would be dreaming if they thought they could eliminate the Pacific fleet and B2s in 20 minutes. Any single sub or B2 could take out that island.
lol, there's more than one island OTB. The islands have modern radar and anti-air defence capabilities and are now support by modern ground based air-superiority aircraft and AWACS. The harpoon is an old, old missile effective against low-tech adversaries. That's why the British Navy has already phased it out, with-out a replacement in-hand.

You missed my point. If the US openly attacked the Chinese islands, US-China would be at a state of war. The Chinese would respond in kind, sinking the 2 carrier battle groups with swarm missile and/or sub attacks in short order (US carrier groups have already been shown to be very vulnerable to AIP subs). Chinese also have EMP and tactical nukes - remember it was a 2016 (?) American study tha argued small tactical nukes are best used at sea against battle groups.

A 5 ship Aegis battlegroup can successfully defend from a simultaneous ~15 subsonic or ~11 supersonic missiles. To take out the carrier in a 8 ship carrier battle group it's estimated a supersonic swarm attack of 3X that would be effective, especially if supported by EW, aircraft and sub attacks. Thus current American doctrine was to stay further away and attack at range allowing more defensive response cycles to occur. But Chinese now have hypersonic "carrier-killer" long range missiles with stealth and evasion capabilities. Even if the battlegroup was prepared with a larger CAP and the extra dedicated anti-air Aegis ship, you can see the groups are vulnerable to a relatively modest swarm / co-ordinated attack.

It's not about the individual islands at all. It's about projecting sovereignty and the islands have now accomplished that. Possession is nine tenths of the law. The world was caught sleeping and will not start a shooting war over the area.

I think nottyboi has an interesting point, maybe they should build an island in the SCS.
 
Last edited:
Toronto Escorts