US asks China to explain why it wants carrier

[psy83]

ASHINGTON: As China commenced sea trials of its first aircraft carrier, the US has sought an explanation from Beijing why it needs this kind of equipment and asked it to be more transparent about its power projections.

"We have had concerns for some time, and we've been quite open about them with regard to the lack of transparency from China regarding its power projection and its lack of access and denial of capabilities," State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters late yesterday.

China's first aircraft carrier set sail for sea trials, as concerns mounted about the country's rapid military buildup amid flaring regional disputes.

"We want to see more transparency. We would welcome any kind of explanation that China would like to give for needing this kind of equipment. As you know, President (Bareck) Obama and President Hu (Jintao) have stated together that they want a healthy and reliable military-to- military relationship."

The latest Chinese military buildup, Nuland said, is part of US's larger concern that China is not as transparent as other countries; it's not as transparent as the US about its military acquisitions, about its military budget.

"This causes concern," she said. Noting that the US would like to have the kind of open, transparent relationship in military-to-military affairs, Nuland said: "In our military-to-military relations with many countries around the world, we have the kind of bilateral dialogue where we can get quite specific about the equipment that we have and its intended purposes and its intended movements, et cetera. We are not at that level of transparency with China that the presidents have said we should have and that we aspire to."


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/9565901.cms

 

[Raiders]

USA can have do many carriers and when they see others having it, they start to question and behaves like a bully.

 

[annexa]

Why don't USA question Japan why they need to build nuclear plants? Why don't USA ask Philippines why they need to buy arms from USA? Talk cock.

 

[Unrepented]

To shoot tourist

The US thought they heard them say "terrorist":o

....... Why don't USA ask Philippines why they need to buy arms from USA? Talk cock.

 

[fenwick]

Why don't USA question Japan why they need to build nuclear plants? Why don't USA ask Philippines why they need to buy arms from USA? Talk cock.

Agree with you bro, none of their fucking business!!! Bloody arrogant USA...........

 

[scroobal]

Explain how the equation works.

The US is a full democracy with structured checks and balances. Any action that is contrary to human rights is better addressed by a democratic system. The Congress will step in, the President will be impeached etc. There is multiple safety values.

China if you had noticed is a country where the people have no say. A few crackpots can start a war and annihilate part of the world. If it was democracy and it was structured democratically, they US will be happily selling them parts and making money out of it.

Name me the country that slaughtered its own citizens in recent years and is a superpower.

Agree with you bro, none of their fucking business!!! Bloody arrogant USA...........

 

[thefarside]

scroobal, as low as you think of China, I would say that the US is a warmongering empire with troops all around the world stirring shit in places where they have no business being in. You can call them a benign superpower but to me they are just another devil in a different disguise. Being a democracy is beside the point - it has certainly not stopped them from waging war when they feel like it. In addition, how well has this structured check and balance worked with Bush?

The crux of the matter is China feels very threatened by the US. They have a long coastline, a huge deficit of energy resources, a hungry and restive population and are ringed by hostile American allies. A short war with the Americans would devastate the Chinese economy and a blockade of the East West trade routes through Singapore would quickly bring China to its knees. The Chinese sees a strong blue water fleet is necessary for their national security.

You think they don't have good people in their military and they are generally lunatics just because they are a communist dictatorship?

 

[uncleyap]

Today's military advantage is NOT about building and deploying carriers - they are outdated. It is rather to effectively sink them instead, especially when the opponent is US Navy, they have the most number of expensive and vulnerable targets.

There are too many alternatives to overcome the need of a floating airbase.

For PRC to secure oil resources in South China Sea, carrier should be their last choice, unless they want decoys.

The effective strategy is to secure the oil by pumping them out and use them fast. Cut some profits to benefit small Asian neighbours like Vietnam & Philippines. The strategy should include educating them that buying American weapons to fight PRC will only be come suckers like Saddam Hussein. Offer them arms and money and assure them if the turned against US, they will be rewarded.

Beijing have to be confident to be the 大哥 in the South China Sea, and make 小弟 like Vietnam & Philippines work for a sum decided by 大哥 and disallow bargaining. A confident 老大 must give guns to 小弟 & ask them if they have the guts to shoot 老大with that gun, and ask them to consider weather they have the ability and size and weight to take over as 老大, if not then must Lan Lan follow order from now on. :p

For 小弟, their education is 听话就分口饭吃，想造反死很难看。 This must be constantly done by showing examples. 杀鸡警猴。

PRC must never let the oil in South China Sea gets into Ang Moh controlled Oil Market then to buy them @ the price they rig. That must STOP for once and for all. War if necessary. PRC will be the big oil consumer, South China Sea is the next oil pool and sea battle ground.

Carriers that can be easily sent to the bottom with weapons 1/10000 of it's cost, are rubbish. Carriers can not hide nor effectively defended.

To secure South China Sea Beijing should reclaim dozens of islands in the strategic locations, for a Great War At Sea, build bases on them, deploy on islands instead of carriers. Islands can not sink, and they are most meaningful territory markers, they are cheaper and faster than carriers to make. Sinking concrete cubes and pre-casted structures can build bases and jetty & runways in South China Sea fast & cheap. Deploy Navy & divers & marines, deploy air force & missiles units, radars, sonar belts, unman mini-subs and unman planes.

Also deploy many oil rigs. Oil rigs with radar and comm relays.

They can build oil rig styled military bases with multiple stands (30 rather then 3) used as semi-mobile bases where torpedos and missiles are on them. Use ship to tow them when they need to be re-deployed. Helicopter or small planes on them. Better than carriers because they cheaper and harder to sink.

If you think LEEgime's Changi Naval base is of any use, then PRC should build dozens of that in the South China Sea but each only a fraction of that scale. For designs they must be Typhoon durable.

At a small fraction of cost to build US Navy 7th fleet, PRC can built and deploy forces enough to sink 5 of such fleets in South China See. The next McArthor in Pacific should be a Chinese.

I had always insisted, that for Taliban to fight US the most key thing is to shoot down helicopters, and for Moscow & Beijing to fight US, it is to KO their satellites and sink their carriers effectively - that means fast and cheaply & irresistibility to kill.

US dare not return to Somalia because several Black Hawks were downed in a same day. Big naval ships are proven to be useless by even Somalian pirates. US will be most afraid if PRC built 2000 mini-subs and unman-sub instead of a carrier. Flood South China Sea with that and each with a supersonic torpedo. Use civilian ships as mother-ships.

Moscow got the idea right that nuke missiles are hidden inside commercial cargo containers. Put lots of that on civilian ships. US Navy can consider themselves shipwrecks.

 

[steffychun]

ASHINGTON: As China commenced sea trials of its first aircraft carrier, the US has sought an explanation from Beijing why it needs this kind of equipment and asked it to be more transparent about its power projections.

"We have had concerns for some time, and we've been quite open about them with regard to the lack of transparency from China regarding its power projection and its lack of access and denial of capabilities," State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters late yesterday.

China's first aircraft carrier set sail for sea trials, as concerns mounted about the country's rapid military buildup amid flaring regional disputes.

"We want to see more transparency. We would welcome any kind of explanation that China would like to give for needing this kind of equipment. As you know, President (Bareck) Obama and President Hu (Jintao) have stated together that they want a healthy and reliable military-to- military relationship."

The latest Chinese military buildup, Nuland said, is part of US's larger concern that China is not as transparent as other countries; it's not as transparent as the US about its military acquisitions, about its military budget.

"This causes concern," she said. Noting that the US would like to have the kind of open, transparent relationship in military-to-military affairs, Nuland said: "In our military-to-military relations with many countries around the world, we have the kind of bilateral dialogue where we can get quite specific about the equipment that we have and its intended purposes and its intended movements, et cetera. We are not at that level of transparency with China that the presidents have said we should have and that we aspire to."


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/9565901.cms

China should ask the US back--why do they have such dumb people like Sarah Palin?

 

[uncleyap]

The Asian countries need to be convinced that USA is the outgoing big brother, and the bets have to be placed correctly right now. And further the wrong bet will cost a long term price to be paid, and this have to be convincing by and example set out as demonstration, it have to be 惨不忍睹。 It have to work.

There are already people within PRC that are like Singaporeans who wants their lifetime chance to see fastest development with the most myopic values. This is like LKy. This is NOT what a 5000 years civilisation should be. This is 眼光短浅，小家子气魄，老妇人眼光。That LKy must see in his own lifetime his own 1st world dream fulfilled, paying long term price for very short term goal.

PRC can wait for another 50 years to build those development, they'll have all they want and need to do it, once they had the current settlement done right, that is to get the ex-superpower USA out of the way 1st. 50 years is nothing to a 5000 years civilisation. The most important thing is to eliminate the factors of selfish myopic minority demanding so called Peace & Stability to enjoy just their very own single lifetime. The higher priority of a 5000 years people can not be cheaply compromised for these 卑微自私小人- LKy the like.

 

[Hans168]

USA can have do many carriers and when they see others having it, they start to question and behaves like a bully.

USA has 11 aircraft carriers; Russia 1; India 1........ how come India not questioned & China is questioned? Even Japan demanded explanation from China!

WTF........ bullying & conspiracy at its worst.

 

[Hans168]

China should ask the US back--why do they have such dumb people like Sarah Palin?

erh.......... George Bush Jr smart???

 

[uncleyap]

要控制南沙群岛， 是这样的武装比航母实际：

http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2011-08/12/c_121849393.htm

中国两栖登陆舰及气垫登陆艇登陆全程​ <tbody> </tbody> <tbody> </tbody>

<tbody>
</tbody>

<tbody>
</tbody>

<tbody>
</tbody>

<tbody>
</tbody>

霎时间，一幅立体登陆的壮美画面在记者眼前展开：空中，铁翼飞旋，登陆兵在预定地点快速滑降；水面，战舟竞渡，各小组从有利方位抵滩，以娴熟的战术动作登陆上岛；海陆间，气垫艇风驰电掣般疾驰，超越岸滩障碍成功登陆……

<tbody>
</tbody>

.

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

China should tell USA.................'' to have carrier, fashionable what now.............''


anyway, 1 US carrier can easily take on 2 or 3 other peoples' carriers mah................

 

[The Philistine]

In turn, China should ask the US why they are committing economic terrorism on themselves and the rest of the world. They should also ask the US why they keep preaching about human rights and advocating democracy when they are the worst abusers of human rights outside their national borders. They should ask the US why Americans voted a cretin in as President for two straight terms. They should ask the US why their some of their college kids cannot even find Iraq on a world map. They should ask the US why a sizable proportion of Americans believe the earth is 6,000 years old and denies the validity of evolution.

Last but not least, they should ask the US to repay their debts. O $ P $

 

[steffychun]

erh.......... George Bush Jr smart???

Smarter than Lee..Bush managed to invaded a country and get away with it.

 

[steffychun]

China should tell USA.................'' to have carrier, fashionable what now.............''


anyway, 1 US carrier can easily take on 2 or 3 other peoples' carriers mah................

you hope US carriers are Titanics

 

[wikiphile]

China should tell USA.................'' to have carrier, fashionable what now.............''


anyway, 1 US carrier can easily take on 2 or 3 other peoples' carriers mah................

An aircraft carrier cannot take on another or 2 more carriers, it is the planes that are on board that provides it with flying firepower. An aircraft carrier on its own its vulnerable to all sorts of threats from all dimensions, hence carriers have an integrated multi-layered defenses in the form of Combat air patrols, destroyers against other capital warships, frigates for submarines hunting and its very own point defense systems when a threat somehow manage to penetrate the outer defenses

 

[steffychun]

An aircraft carrier cannot take on another or 2 more carriers, it is the planes that are on board that provides it with flying firepower. An aircraft carrier on its own its vulnerable to all sorts of threats from all dimensions, hence carriers have an integrated multi-layered defenses in the form of Combat air patrols, destroyers against other capital warships, frigates for submarines hunting and its very own point defense systems when a threat somehow manage to penetrate the outer defenses

Yes sensei we know this

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

An aircraft carrier cannot take on another or 2 more carriers, it is the planes that are on board that provides it with flying firepower. An aircraft carrier on its own its vulnerable to all sorts of threats from all dimensions, hence carriers have an integrated multi-layered defenses in the form of Combat air patrols, destroyers against other capital warships, frigates for submarines hunting and its very own point defense systems when a threat somehow manage to penetrate the outer defenses

wrong liao...................it's the people operating the hardware that's important................


but the women that gave birth to them are even more important lor..........................