3 huge U.S Aircraft Carriers heading to Senkaku

Posted in the China Forum

3 U S carriers to Senkaku

Clarksville, MD

#1 Sep 30, 2012
3 huge U.S Aircraft Carriers heading to Senkaku - China has no choice but to back off....

TOKYO – It’s probably just a coincidence; no need to worry yet. But the U.S. has quietly assembled a powerful air, land and sea armada not far from where Japan and China are squaring off over disputed islands in the East China Sea.

Two Navy aircraft carrier battle groups and a Marine Corps air-ground task force have begun operating in the Western Pacific, within easy reach of the Senkaku Islands. That’s where Japanese and Chinese patrol boats are engaged in an increasingly tense standoff.

Chinese vessels have repeatedly entered territorial waters around the small islands in recent weeks and Coast Guard vessels from Japan and Taiwan fired water cannons at each other last week. The islands are controlled and administered by Japan, but claimed by both China and Taiwan.

No warships have been directly involved in the confrontations, so far. But China has vowed to continue sending patrol vessels into territorial waters and Japan has assembled scores of Coast Guard vessels to “defend” the islands.

3 U S carriers to Senkaku

Clarksville, MD

#2 Sep 30, 2012
One green signal from the U.S...is all it takes for Japan to sink all Chinese ships!!!!!!!!

Brooklyn, NY

#3 Oct 1, 2012

Someone should inform them that carriers are obsolete!

2 Cents

Taoyüan, Taiwan

#4 Oct 1, 2012
Haha. Another war monger like myself. There's nothing more fun than playing armchair general from the safety of our homes. I can't wait for the fight to start. Could be the best fight we've seen in decades. Finally, we're fighting someone our own size. The U.S. picking on all those small third world countries is like watching a heavy weight boxer pummel a light weight boxer - bloody but not very exciting at all. With any luck, it'll be a good fight with hard damaging blows inflicted to both sides. If it goes nuclear, I won't even have to look for a job or worry about the bank taking away my home any more. Fantastic!

Brooklyn, NY

#5 Oct 1, 2012
I've always maintained that Uncle Sam needs to make her(sic) move now. With China growing more powerful day by day, it's now or never.

Shenzhen, China

#6 Oct 1, 2012
I've always maintained that Uncle Sam needs to make her(sic) move now. With China growing more powerful day by day, it's now or never.
Your Uncle should have made its move 10 years ago, when China was still No. 7 economy. Now's too late.

Chna surpasses U.S. economy in 2018.

Forest Park, GA

#7 Oct 2, 2012
This dispute is caused by ultimately a small mistake made by the U.S. We should play fair and just admit our mistake. Sending our troops there to die for a stupid mistake that our ancestors made over 40 years ago is not worth it.

Shenzhen, China

#8 Oct 3, 2012
ATT wrote:
This dispute is caused by ultimately a small mistake made by the U.S. We should play fair and just admit our mistake. Sending our troops there to die for a stupid mistake that our ancestors made over 40 years ago is not worth it.
Exactly. Another Nixon mistake.
Old Jew

San Francisco, CA

#9 Oct 3, 2012
Why fight over those small worthless Islands. There are more seagulls than people there.

Richmond, Canada

#10 Oct 3, 2012
This Week at War: An Arms Race America Can’t Win

The United States has no chance in ship-for-ship showdown with China. Luckily, it shouldn't have to have one.

U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) forecasts that China's navy will own 106 major warships in 2020, up from 86 in 2009. Seventy-two of these are expected to be attack submarines, compared to 29 for the United States in the Pacific in 2020, under the 60 percent allocation assumption. For the two decades beyond 2020, the U.S. Navy's shipbuilding plan projects no increase in the number of major warships. China's long-range shipbuilding plans are unknown; however, its defense budget has increased at an 11.8 percent compound annual rate, after inflation, between 2000 and 2012, with no indications of any changes to that trend.

Of course, counting ships does not tell the whole story. Even more critical are the missions assigned to these ships and the conditions under which they will fight. In a hypothetical conflict between the United States and China for control of the South and East China Seas, the continental power would enjoy substantial structural advantages over U.S. forces.

China, for instance, would be able to use its land-based air power, located at many dispersed and hardened bases, against naval targets. The ONI forecasts China's inventory of maritime strike aircraft rising from 145 in 2009 to 348 by 2020. U.S. land-based air power in the Western Pacific operates from just a few bases, which are vulnerable to missile attack from China (the Cold War-era Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty prevents the United States from developing theater-based surface-to-surface missiles with ranges sufficient to put Chinese bases at risk). A comparison of ship counts similarly does not include China's land-based anti-ship cruise missiles, fired from mobile truck launchers. Nor does it account for China's fleet of coastal patrol boats, also armed with anti-ship cruise missiles.


Richmond, Canada

#11 Oct 3, 2012
The Air-Sea Battle concept began as an effort to improve staff coordination and planning between the Navy and the Air Force in an effort to address the structural disadvantages these forces would have when going up against a well-armed continental power like China. The concept is about creating operational synergies between the services. An example of this synergy occurred in last year's campaign against Libya, when U.S. Navy cruise missiles destroyed Libya's air defense system, clearing the way for the U.S. Air Force to operate freely over the country.

But Air-Sea Battle still faces enormous challenges in overcoming the "home court" advantage a continental power enjoys deploying its missile forces from hidden, dispersed, and hardened sites. In addition, the United States faces a steep "marginal cost" problem with an opponent like China; additional defenses for U.S. ships are more expensive than additional Chinese missiles. And China can acquire hundreds or even thousands of missiles for the cost of one major U.S. warship.

Given these structural weaknesses, Air-Sea Battle's success will rely not on endlessly parrying the enemy's missiles, but striking deeply at the adversary's command posts, communications networks, reconnaissance systems, and basing hubs in order to prevent missiles from being launched in the first place. Such strikes would mean attacks on space systems, computer networks, and infrastructure, with implications for the broader civilian economy and society. Some critics of Air-Sea Battle reason that raising the stakes in this manner would make terminating a conflict much more difficult and would escalate the conflict into domains -- such as space and cyber -- that are particular vulnerabilities for the United States.

The United States won't be able to win an arms race against China and currently has no plans to do so. Nor can the Pentagon count on superior military technology; China already has impressive scientific and engineering capabilities, which are only getting better.


Shenzhen, China

#12 Oct 3, 2012
Any way you look at it, the Japs are dead meat.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

China Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Germany's Merkel signals Japan could do more to... Sun WORMDRUGABEMIDEBD... 174
america is finished new world is here Sun so good 1
an indian pervert rapes a JAPANESE tourist in j... Sun Drgunzet 104
Poll Chinese girls likes Indian men and try to get s... (Oct '10) Sun How Barbaric 337
News Taipei's maverick mayor sparks backlash over Ch... Mar 27 TehO 29
many filipina are slut, cheap, backstabber and (Jul '13) Mar 26 Yea 9
News On This Day: People's Republic of China Replace... Mar 26 bobs56 1
More from around the web