Chinese submarine stalked USS Kittyhawk

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: astrosfan90

Originally posted by: Arkaign

True enough, but I submit that China is our strongest global ally at the moment, and as long as they strive to be an economic superpower, probably will remain so. Britain is near powerless, Germany and France are no friends, and Russia is publically hostile to US global influence. Only China has so much at stake with the US, it would be most foolhardy indeed to strain the lifeblood of their resurgence, their economic ties to the US, with some form of new cold war.

That's a bit contradictory IMO though. China is indeed the only other power in the world that can compete with the US at the moment (assymetrical warfare notwithstanding, which has rather thrown a wrench in your typical balance of power systems lately), and as such, the two are, like it or not, poised for conflict at some point. It's inevitable. The only time the US has had competition for global dominance since it's rise to power was Russia during the Cold War. I find it unlikely that the US will willingly step aside to share the helm with China in a bi-polar world, and I find it unlikely that China will deccelerate their progress in order to avoid competing with the US. As a result, we're in a bit of a political game of chicken at the moment. The only unknown is the distance to impact.

These wargames are played frequently by all capable navies. Remember, of all the people in the world, the fact remains that if you are in the navy, you have more in common with the guys in that other sub/ship, than anyone at home in either country. Navy men are a particularly brave and hearty bunch, as historically it's a fantastically dangerous job, and one that requires rigorous training and aptitude.

Tempest in a teapot to ruffle feathers over this. The distilled truth is that one of our ships was watched by one of theirs, when most likely one of our Los Angeles attack subs watched that one. All very friendly really. Naval manuevers such as that are as common as you and I breathing.

The real interesting aspect of this is how it got leaked to the press, and who stands to gain from this kind of fear-mongering.

Perhaps, but the fact that the carrier group seemed unaware of the sub's presence until it was that close is certainly rather humbling for a naval force that considers itself nearly invincible and certainly unequalled in the world.

Also agree that one of the more interesting bits is the fact that it leaked, and how. But I doubt we'll ever know.

I agree with much of your summary of the natural competition between the US and China. I also respectfully submit that it is unique in modern history to have this kind of relationship between such mutually powerful nations. There are many indicators which point towards a peaceful coexistence, from China's emerging capitalist tendencies, to the huge distance that lies between us physically.

It could go either way, but I tend to look on it as a peaceful progression between the US and China, as other mutual enemies and obstacles to normal trade emerge. For example, if Iran went rogue and started massive invasions (unlikely), I think we could depend on Chinese support, as it would greatly threaten their sphere of influence as well. See how the Chinese have treated their domestic Muslim population for a hint of how they feel about religious fundamentalism, or even moderate religious empowerment and freedom.

The best I can close with, is that it remains to be seen. I will lean slightly to optimism on this issue. Cheers.

 

[astrosfan90]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

I agree with much of your summary of the natural competition between the US and China. I also respectfully submit that it is unique in modern history to have this kind of relationship between such mutually powerful nations. There are many indicators which point towards a peaceful coexistence, from China's emerging capitalist tendencies, to the huge distance that lies between us physically.

It could go either way, but I tend to look on it as a peaceful progression between the US and China, as other mutual enemies and obstacles to normal trade emerge. For example, if Iran went rogue and started massive invasions (unlikely), I think we could depend on Chinese support, as it would greatly threaten their sphere of influence as well. See how the Chinese have treated their domestic Muslim population for a hint of how they feel about religious fundamentalism, or even moderate religious empowerment and freedom.

The best I can close with, is that it remains to be seen. I will lean slightly to optimism on this issue. Cheers.

Indeed. I agree that it could go either way.

Pardon the incoming history lesson--I love this sorta stuff.

I don't know if you're familiar with Jean Monnet and his theories on integration, but he was essentially the architect of the EU. I don't recall the name of the theory offhand (the spillover effect, maybe?), but he's rather known for arguing that the closer you force two nations to work together in one sphere, the closer they grow in all spheres. The theory was that if you forced France and Germany to cooperate in a trade environment (European Coal and Steel Community), you could force the two to grow closer as that interaction forced them to find common ground in many different areas. For instance, if German trucks were to deliver coal products to French buyers, the Germans would have to account for French trucking laws, speed limits, and safety requirements in their trucks. As such, it would eventually make sense for the Germans to adapt similar requirements. Down the road, French environmental legislation might take into account German trucking interests, and German trade unions might take into account French interests. Eventually this would work its way into both societies at such a deep level that conflict between the two would become highly unlikely. This was the idea behind the EU--to put an end to the land wars that seemed to break out constantly in Europe.

In any case, I'd say the same applies to China and the US due to the way global politics works these days, certainly moreso than any two powers in the past. The US and China, as major trading partners and forced partners through entities such as the UN, have more in common than they might otherwise, and their respective interests both political and economic force the two to maintain a friendly relationship that would make conflict difficult.

I still think that it's possible though. Time will tell. I think it will ultimately come down to the US' willingness to share the world stage with China, and the Chinese drive to share it with us, and whether the two can meet eye to eye. No matter how friendly, if China wants a share of the spotlight and we don't want to give it over, conflict of one sort or another will break out.

 

[judasmachine]

grow up man, do you think we aren't doing the same thing?

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Passions
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061113-121539-3317r.htm

I say we should have taken it out!!!!

They have no right to be within 5 miles of our carriers. :|

Warships in international waters normally request a safe passing distance between 0.5 miles to 2 miles at sea, specially if they are involved in any maneuvers like aircraft launching/ recovery, replenishment etc. Prudent merchant ships tend to give them more room due to their erratic navigation.

5 miles is too far to worry about. Remember no one has priority in international waters. US also subscribes to the 12 mile territorial limit. The sub had every right to be within 5 miles of the carrier. Whether or not it was a stupid move is a different matter.

Taking out the sub would be an act of aggression or war.

 

[slash196]

Ouch. And our boys are supposed to be the best at sea...if this is no longer the case (which a Chinese boat getting that close undetected suggests) we may be in for a surprise if we ever go ship-to-ship with another country again.

That said, there's no reason to get mad at the Chinese. They were doing a stalking drill, our boats do it all the time as well. We need to be looking at our own sonar operators, not chiding the Chinese for exposing a weakness that they didn't exploit.

 

[judasmachine]

Oh yeah and our stealth aircraft were tested over Soviet airspace, not to mention the whole U2 program..............

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: astrosfan90

Originally posted by: Arkaign

I agree with much of your summary of the natural competition between the US and China. I also respectfully submit that it is unique in modern history to have this kind of relationship between such mutually powerful nations. There are many indicators which point towards a peaceful coexistence, from China's emerging capitalist tendencies, to the huge distance that lies between us physically.

It could go either way, but I tend to look on it as a peaceful progression between the US and China, as other mutual enemies and obstacles to normal trade emerge. For example, if Iran went rogue and started massive invasions (unlikely), I think we could depend on Chinese support, as it would greatly threaten their sphere of influence as well. See how the Chinese have treated their domestic Muslim population for a hint of how they feel about religious fundamentalism, or even moderate religious empowerment and freedom.

The best I can close with, is that it remains to be seen. I will lean slightly to optimism on this issue. Cheers.

Indeed. I agree that it could go either way.

Pardon the incoming history lesson--I love this sorta stuff.

I don't know if you're familiar with Jean Monnet and his theories on integration, but he was essentially the architect of the EU. I don't recall the name of the theory offhand (the spillover effect, maybe?), but he's rather known for arguing that the closer you force two nations to work together in one sphere, the closer they grow in all spheres. The theory was that if you forced France and Germany to cooperate in a trade environment (European Coal and Steel Community), you could force the two to grow closer as that interaction forced them to find common ground in many different areas. For instance, if German trucks were to deliver coal products to French buyers, the Germans would have to account for French trucking laws, speed limits, and safety requirements in their trucks. As such, it would eventually make sense for the Germans to adapt similar requirements. Down the road, French environmental legislation might take into account German trucking interests, and German trade unions might take into account French interests. Eventually this would work its way into both societies at such a deep level that conflict between the two would become highly unlikely. This was the idea behind the EU--to put an end to the land wars that seemed to break out constantly in Europe.

In any case, I'd say the same applies to China and the US due to the way global politics works these days, certainly moreso than any two powers in the past. The US and China, as major trading partners and forced partners through entities such as the UN, have more in common than they might otherwise, and their respective interests both political and economic force the two to maintain a friendly relationship that would make conflict difficult.

I still think that it's possible though. Time will tell. I think it will ultimately come down to the US' willingness to share the world stage with China, and the Chinese drive to share it with us, and whether the two can meet eye to eye. No matter how friendly, if China wants a share of the spotlight and we don't want to give it over, conflict of one sort or another will break out.

Very cool stuff! I look forward to more dialogues with you on these issues. Signing off here, will check back later.

 

[flyboy84]

I work on the Navy's next generation anti-submarine helicopter, the MH-60R. This makes me realize how important my job is! I'm hanging the article up in my cubicle

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Maybe the Chinese wanted to get a better look at their future property....

Well, it should be clear that they were just wanting to know what we did with all those parts that were "Made in China".

This is not a serious issue in terms of leading to anything. We probe them and they probe us.

If you want to be concerned with China, check the label on literally anything you buy.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

If you want to be concerned with China, check the label on literally anything you buy.

Or check out this little gem

 

[ayabe]

Many of you don't have all the facts on this issue, our Pacific Fleet Commander is in Beijing right now, this was a provacative act plain and simple. We are trying to garner trust in the Chinese by opening up some of our military methodogies to help ease the tensions between us. The Chinese are throwing this back in our face.

Also, we did not detect the sub, this was their way of telling us that they can sink one of our carriers whenever they want, so we better not think of helping Taiwan. Make no mistake about it, the Chinese want us out of Asia completely. As long as we continue to pander to them, and put up with their grossly unfair trade practices we are going to continue to lose ground until China is running the show. They are taking our money that we give them buying their ****** products and are using the money to build weapons to destroy us.

Our current policy towards China is beyond belief.

 

[Termagant]

This is a huge affront by the Chinese while the Admiral is in China. It's part of their two faced probing policy to test American reactions.

But what also must be understood is that there is a movement in the US to become more hawkish on China that is somewhat inexplicable. The economic integration argument noted above is a possible course for the two great powers to take.

But there are certain American elements who seem to be wishing for a war. Maybe to keep the defense contracts going after the War on Terror is over in a few years. At the forefront of course are Bill Gertz and Scarborough at the Wash Times who revealed this latest incident, Rep. Duncan Hunter comes to mind as well. And they turn to the economic protectionists such as Lou Dobbs to promote their ideas of conflict.

China has unfair trade practices but there is no reason for the US to enact ridiculous Pat Buchanan protectionism. There's no reason for the US to have garment sweatshops. It's not a nationally vital industry. For nationally vital industries such as steel forging, government support of forges is called for.

My point is that we can continue pushing for economic benefits on both sides of the Pacific, or we can wish for war and hope we'll be rich enough that our own children won't have to fight, just our poorer neighbors. US industries can take jobs and business FROM Chinese firms through the use of technology and competitive practices. I have seen it with my own eyes; we don't want to become protectionists and have a stagnant economy that will be only more painful when we inevitably open it up again in the future.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Specop 007Not good to show your enemy your playbook.

The Great Battle of Information and Intelligence is an every-day game of tit-for-tat information/misinformation/disinformation "exchanges" amongst the world's largest powers-that-be.

nothing new here.

This happened under the current Commander's watch.

I'm not saying it wouldn't have happened under a Democrat's watch or my watch but it happened.

It's not pleasant to know one of our battle groups can still be taken out Pearl Harbor style in 2006.

you've got to be kidding me... you're going to blame Bush for this as well?!

what a joke...

That's sort of what I was saying. I'm far from a Bush supporter, but I can't follow the logic of blaming him for something this obscure. I know the theory that ultimate responsiblity for all military action lies with the commander-in-chief, but logically, this has nothing to do with Bush's handling of national defense.

I do think that the story is alarmist trash, however. Strikes me as trying to cheaply score fear points, and to serve as a distraction from real issues facing us today.

It's just another example of what occurs when civlians try to understand and second-guess the military.

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Don't tell me, Clinton is Commander in Chief right???

ummm, one time, In Afghanistan, my platoon sergeant got our squad lost... and we ended up missing dinner chow... and driving through a minefield... should I blame Bush?! ok, fine.. damn him... I think I'll write and tell him so now.

Dear President Bush...

ps: does the "d" in your nickname here stand for "Duh"?

Followed by an "m?" :shocked:

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: slash196
Ouch. And our boys are supposed to be the best at sea...if this is no longer the case (which a Chinese boat getting that close undetected suggests) we may be in for a surprise if we ever go ship-to-ship with another country again.

That said, there's no reason to get mad at the Chinese. They were doing a stalking drill, our boats do it all the time as well. We need to be looking at our own sonar operators, not chiding the Chinese for exposing a weakness that they didn't exploit.

I have little doubt that a Los Angeles class was keeping an eye on the Chinese sub and we just aren't advertising that fact.

 

[eilute]

I'm not sure if they are overstepping any boundaries, but this one takes the cake:

U.S. aircraft collides with Chinese fighter, forced to land
April 1, 2001

BEIJING, China (CNN) -- A U.S. reconnaissance plane carrying a crew of 24 collided with a Chinese fighter Sunday, forcing the U.S. craft to make an emergency landing in the People's Republic of China.

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/04/01/us.china.plane.03/

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: slash196
Ouch. And our boys are supposed to be the best at sea...if this is no longer the case (which a Chinese boat getting that close undetected suggests) we may be in for a surprise if we ever go ship-to-ship with another country again.

That said, there's no reason to get mad at the Chinese. They were doing a stalking drill, our boats do it all the time as well. We need to be looking at our own sonar operators, not chiding the Chinese for exposing a weakness that they didn't exploit.

Not much new here. Diesel subs are very quiet. During joint manoeuvers a few years ago, a Canadian sub got close enough to get a confirmed 'kill' on a US battle group.

 

[Rainsford]

You know, I think our biggest problem with China is going to be that they hold no illusions at all about how they see us in the world, while we keep thinking their our bestest buddies because we want to keep buying cheap crap from Wal-Mart. Within a few decades they are going to be at least as big of a problem as the Soviet Union was in the bad old days, only this time we're too busy looking the other way to notice.

Personally I think we need to make it clear just who has the upper hand in this particular game...while we've still got it. Don't get me wrong, I'm totally fine with the idea of another super-power (I think it might actually help in a lot of instances), I just don't think China plays well with others. The only reason they are as subdued as they are right now is because we're still holding the stick. And even now they're selling weapons to Iran and all sorts of unneighborly things. I think our best long term bet is to support India as much as possible. They will be a very useful country to keep China in check, and they are a democracy (more or less)...I think they'd be far better friends than China ever would be.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: slash196
Ouch. And our boys are supposed to be the best at sea...if this is no longer the case (which a Chinese boat getting that close undetected suggests) we may be in for a surprise if we ever go ship-to-ship with another country again.

That said, there's no reason to get mad at the Chinese. They were doing a stalking drill, our boats do it all the time as well. We need to be looking at our own sonar operators, not chiding the Chinese for exposing a weakness that they didn't exploit.

Not much new here. Diesel subs are very quiet. During joint manoeuvers a few years ago, a Canadian sub got close enough to get a confirmed 'kill' on a US battle group.

Indeed. Mostly because when they are underwater and trying to be quiet, they run on battery power, which is virtually silent. Of course that comes with a LOT of limitations, particularly when it comes to blue water navy activities. It's quite possible that China could give us a challenge in their own waters (although I suspect our subs were doing something that wasn't in this story...), but outside of their own territory I suspect they'd have a LOT of trouble actually projecting force. As large as China's army is, their Navy is notoriously crappy...this particular event is newsworthy because it IS unusual, I wonder how often OUR subs get close enough to sink the best the Chinese have to offer?

 

[fitzov]

I say we try to appease them with more treasury bills and a greater trade deficit.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: tomywishbone
It could have been a delivery from City Wok.




Edit: In an effort to protect their children from kidnappers, the parents of South Park hire the owner and operator of the local City Wok to build a Great Wall around the city. When crazy things like Kid trackers and Mongolions come into the picture. The parents learn a very important lesson themselves about trusting strangers.
:laugh:

FVCKING MONGOOOOOOOWEANS!!!

 

[fskimospy]

The sea areas around China (especially in the straights of taiwan, etc) are shallow and noisy. This is a perfect place for their submarines to operate... a nightmare scenario for our navy.

Our carriers in general are extremely vulnerable to submarine attack even in the best circumstances, so this should come as no surprise that a chinese sub was able to get so close. I think everyone VASTLY overestimates China's military capabilities though. Vastly. Their subs are diesel, which while being quiet for short periods of time have to surface to recharge their batteries. This gives off an absolutely huge IR plume, and.. well... makes them sitting ducks.

China's military capabilities are barely enough to defend their own national borders, much less fight any significant enemy. Not only is the vast majority of their equipment extremely outdated, but they lack the logistical support to move anything more then a fraction of their army outside of the borders of China. Sure they may have a million man army... how are they going to feed it though??

The US spent an absolutely insane amount of money on our military in 2005...about $480 billion. China spent $41 billion. China is simply not even in the game when it comes to being a superpower.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: eskimospyThe US spent an absolutely insane amount of money on our military in 2005...about $480 billion. China spent $41 billion. China is simply not even in the game when it comes to being a superpower.

not militarily; however, economically they are right on track to challenge the US in ways that may have consequences which are just as dramatic.

 

[Genx87]

I thought China has been found to spend closer to 90 billion a year?

btw an interesting thing to consider. If China had a per capita gdp equal to the United States their GDP would be close to 40 trillion a year. If they spent the same % as us on defense we are talking ~1.4 Trillion a year in defense spending.

It will come in time. This time however we dont have the communist closer market system that will kill them from within. China is opening up their markets and will be very tough to defeat both economically and militarily.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I thought China has been found to spend closer to 90 billion a year?

btw an interesting thing to consider. If China had a per capita gdp equal to the United States their GDP would be close to 40 trillion a year. If they spent the same % as us on defense we are talking ~1.4 Trillion a year in defense spending.

It will come in time. This time however we dont have the communist closer market system that will kill them from within. China is opening up their markets and will be very tough to defeat both economically and militarily.

China as the next economic superpower is overrated. Their one child policy is going to come back and bite them in the ass, their population will turn grey more than ours. Plus their financial system is broken as hell with lots of nonperforming loans.

 

[fskimospy]

China definitely has ways to hurt us and throw some monkey wrenches in our business... no doubt. They are also getting stronger quickly. I just wouldn't worry about them being able to stand up to our military any time soon.

As for their per capita GDP, wikipedia pegs it at about $1,700US. The per capita GDP of the US is about $44,000. So their economy will have to grow nearly twentyfold before they are where we are at. Their economy is growing rapidly... but that's quite a hill to climb.

China also suffers from a lot of really bad internal stability problems that people tend not to hear about so much. The vast majority of the wealth of china is located on the eastern coast, with huge swaths of pesantry throughout the countryside barely surviving. There have been a large number of revolts, etc. that have occured there in recent years... and I am not at all convinced that China will be able to maintain their internal situation if things continue as they have.

I don't know. I guess my point is that China is certainly an up and coming power, and their economic clout certainly puts them in a position that they can exert influence over us to a certain extent. I just don't think they are anywhere close to as powerful at this point as many people think they are.