DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Eye on China » America’s Arsenal Aimed at China

America’s Arsenal Aimed at China

Usually, I write about small things: a tight-​​knit group of cops, a sin­gle mur­der, a squad of sol­diers, one crazy game. My cover story (!) in this month’s Popular Mechanics is my first attempt to go big. Really big. $70 bil­lion big.
200604-sb.jpgThe idea was to take the President and the SecDef at their words — that the “Long War” against Islamic extrem­ism is the country’s top mil­i­tary pri­or­ity. Does the Pentagon’s $70 bil­lion a year bud­get for new weapons back that up? Is America’s arse­nal being geared towards counter-​​terror, counter-​​insurgency type fights?
Take a guess.
Inside the defense estab­lish­ment, the Long War has com­pe­ti­tion. In many minds, the real threat is a ris­ing China. And, at least when it comes to acqui­si­tions, the China crowd has the upper hand. Which means the weapons bud­get is packed with gear — Joint Strike Fighters, DD(X) destroy­ers — opti­mized for a big war in the Pacific, not a messy one in the Middle East.
The story hasn’t appeared online, yet. I’ll let you know when it does. But Tom Barnett, who’s quoted sev­eral times in the piece, has some excerpts up on his blog.

Share |

March 21st, 2006 | Eye on China, Strategery | 308133 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/03/21/americas-arsenal-aimed-at-china/America%27s+Arsenal+Aimed+at+China2006-03-21+16%3A02%3A32david_axe You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Is That a Chem-​​Bio Munition? | Iraqi Police = Shi’ite Militia? » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Byron Skinner says:
    March 21, 2006 at 1:29 pm

    Good Morning Folks,
    As a long time reader of “Popular Mechanics”, since the days it was $.25 on the news stand, you do the math, I’m pleased that they chose to write such a story. For those of you who have read the cur­rent issue you will notice the PM is ques­tion­ing the need for these weapon sys­tems both on costs and the via­bil­ity of the “Long War” doc­trine in the 2006 QDR.
    PM has put Defense spend­ing front and cen­ter on mid­dle Americas table, let hope that pub­lic dia­logue is forth com­ming on this sub­ject.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  2. DS says:
    March 21, 2006 at 2:55 pm

    You know what I can’t help notic­ing? Our senior mil­i­tary brass, our Senators, our media, and our President seem to be dead set on this ‘threat’ from China. But you know what? I haven’t heard one sin­gle word from China that even SUGGESTS that they want a war with us. NOTHING. The only ‘com­bat­ive’ state­ments they’ve made so far are in regards to Taiwan’s inde­pen­dence, and that has more of a polit­i­cal angle to it than any­thing. I think, instead of doing their best to pro­voke some kind of con­fronta­tion with China, the ‘voices’ in our coun­try need to start using diplo­macy and see if we can actu­ally work with another super­power instead of always hav­ing to dominate.

    Reply
  3. dj elliott says:
    March 21, 2006 at 5:05 pm

    Military plan­ning and procur­ment is based on capa­bil­i­ties, not inten­tions.
    Intentions change.
    Mind read­ing is an inex­act art.
    It is nor­mal to pick the biggest poten­tial prob­lem and plan your force around it. That way smaller prob­lems are (in the­ory) eas­ily han­dled.
    China is a ris­ing and mod­ern­iz­ing power with ter­ri­to­r­ial dis­putes with sev­eral dif­fer­ent allies and is the largest com­mu­nist coun­try left.
    Is it any sur­prise that the plans are focused on them?
    The Case Orange stud­ies were not started because we had bad rela­tions with Japan, at the time we didn’t. They were started because Japan was the biggest poten­tial problem…

    Reply
  4. DS says:
    March 21, 2006 at 5:12 pm

    While I agree that plan­ning for every con­ciev­able threat is smart, and nec­es­sary to main­tain a strong defense, I think our mil­i­tary plan­ners should do a bet­ter job of keep­ing such reports restricted to ‘need to know’ eyes only. Way too much inflam­ma­tory press is going out these days based on leaks (whether inten­tional or not) and speculation.

    Reply
  5. Will Wheeler says:
    March 21, 2006 at 5:41 pm

    You are right that China does not want a war. The only rea­son they will not start a war with us right now is because they still need us, and our resources. There will come a point in time where China’s growth will be ham­pered by the West. At that point China will become a lot more mil­i­tar­ily agres­sive, to con­tinue it’s explo­sive growth.
    As far as China not say­ing any­thing provk­ing, they are say­ing one thing, but their actions belie another inten­tion. They are look­ing to expand their influ­ence, and are also look­ing to take con­trol over as many nat­ural resources as pos­si­ble. They want to be the num­ber one on the block, they are doing every­thing they can to get there.
    I don’t know about you, but I seri­ously doubt that any coun­try that is spy­ing on us, as well as bulid­ing more missles to aim at us has any good inten­tions for the future.
    Anyone who doubts China’s inten­tions needs to read the Art of War by Sun Tsu. It’s almost as if China is using it as a play­book. This is not about co-​​exisitng with a super­power, this is, or at least it needs to be about America and her Allies being able to secure out future, and not allow our­selves to become sec­ond fid­dle to a Communist powerhouse.

    Reply
  6. Charles says:
    March 21, 2006 at 8:46 pm

    Sorry to barge in OT, but the two posts above this appear to be locked..
    Anyways. The “China” crowd is just the “Soviet” peo­ple again, fight­ing the same “Red Commies” from last time, down to sim­i­lar equip­ment and doc­trines. The Soviet Union had no desire to get blown to smithereens and China has no such desire either. The urban class of China want to become con­sumerist and mate­ri­al­is­tic just like us Americans, and going to war is the short path to wartime rationing and the pos­si­bil­ity of immi­nent death.
    This means our pol­icy and method of deal­ing with China will be cloak and dag­ger, car­rot and stick.

    Reply
  7. katsesama says:
    March 21, 2006 at 9:03 pm

    Its easy to point out the pol­icy dif­fer­ences in
    regards to china and the mid­dle east.Its two
    dif­fer­ent types of warfare,though i don’t believe the per­spec­tives been squed one more
    over the other.The sit­u­a­tion in the mid­dle east
    demands a proac­tive approach because the enemy is
    an active one,and resources are at issue.The chi­nese
    sit­u­a­tion is of some con­cern because of chi­nas long
    term ambitions,but requires steady preper­a­tion as
    china is only just now tran­si­tion­ing from an self
    defen­sive mil­i­tary pos­ture to one with aims at
    pro­ject­ing poten­tial global power​.So yes,we should
    put some more thought into the long war as the pop­u­lar mechan­ics arti­cle sug­gests because of its
    immediacy,but one would be remiss to not pay some
    atten­tion to the ris­ing dragon in the east.

    Reply
  8. DS says:
    March 21, 2006 at 9:11 pm

    I can’t tell you how nice it is to be kick­ing around issues on a forum with rea­son­ably think­ing peo­ple, and with­out the mind­less ban­ter that goes on else­where…
    : )

    Reply
  9. Murc says:
    March 21, 2006 at 10:53 pm

    This isn’t any­thing new.
    Its smart to plan for the big war, and hope it never hap­pens.
    I can see the argu­ment that the money would be bet­ter spent on counter-​​terrorism type of projects, whether that be from IED destroy­ers or secur­ing our bor­der bet­ter by using more peo­ple, cam­eras, and UAV’s, but you MUST keep the capa­bil­ity to go toe-​​2-​​toe with ANY nation on earth, to me, thats sim­ply not negotiable.

    Reply
  10. JQP says:
    March 22, 2006 at 9:18 am

    With Russia sell­ing oil and gas to China so as to allow China to expand over the next decade or so looks a win — win for both par­ties. Things could look a lot worse if OPEC or some mem­bers from OPEC decided to con­cen­trate upon meet­ing the energy require­ments of both China and India then the West might well have cause to worry. To echo thoughts made by DS send in the politi­cians, trade offi­cials and oth­ers as jaw, jaw is prefer­able to war, war.

    Reply
  11. dj elliott says:
    March 22, 2006 at 1:08 pm

    DS:
    I would love to see the peo­ple who leak these clas­si­fied studies/​planning pro­ce­cuted for the felony they have com­mited.
    However, most of them are in con­gress.
    And the reporters who act as their acces­sories think they are above the law.
    The inher­ent flaw in a free soci­ety. I have not came up with fix for it that does not undu­ely sur­press our free­dom, have you?

    Reply
  12. McAristotle says:
    March 22, 2006 at 8:03 pm

    Maybe because any new project to tar­get insur­gency
    would deliver like 10 years later.
    Plus no track record has been shown of tech­nol­ogy mak­ing a huge dif­fer­ence in insur­gency — which can just adjust tac­tics. If you have an explo­sive detec­tor, they can just learn to seal the explo­sives under plas­tic to hide fumes or make decoys…If you have armored humvees — you make big­ger bombs.
    And long to not, the ‘War on Terror’ will have moved on by then. It may still be on but I doubt there would be an Iraq sit­u­a­tion.
    Besides this might be a game the­ory sig­nal to China to stop its cur­rent Defense bud­get growth which is higher than its eco­nomic growth…

    Reply
  13. Richard says:
    March 24, 2006 at 11:04 am

    Powermonging, bat­tling per­ceived threats, and greed, i.e. spend­ing insane pots of cash on defense, or actu­ally try­ing to decrease the NEED for threats, power and greed world­wide, i.e. spend­ing on the reduc­tion of poverty and suf­fer­ing, and sci­ence. Which is bet­ter?
    The US is on top, and plans to stay there. That aim, in itself, has reduced it to the great­est threat to world­wide free­dom of the last, say, 81 years, not least free­dom in the US itself. If you’re an American, you won’t care. Which is why we won’t when the US fail and even more Americans are plunged into abject poverty.

    Reply
  14. Anand says:
    September 23, 2006 at 9:10 pm

    This American Administration just want to keep paint­ing every­body in this world who hap­pen to sub­scribe to dif­fer­ent reli­gious belief or hap­pen to be NOT ‘white’ as per­ceived ene­mies in order to jus­tify the con­tin­u­ous exis­tence of this mil­i­tary indus­trial com­plex so fore­warned by Ike in the early 60’s. The Americans, as pointed out by the recent IMF report are already bor­row­ing more than two thirds of the world’s net sav­ings or 2.2 bil­lion dol­lars a day just to finance this ‘American way’ of life. One can­not help but won­der how long this can go on as all these obscene money just go to enrich a few of the well con­nected fat cats. Looks like the American pub­lic needs to wake up and stop lis­ten­ing to all these lies and mis­in­for­ma­tion and do some­thing pos­i­tive about their near bank­rupt coun­try. All these mmoney could have been bet­ter spent in fight­ing dis­eases like AIDS and can­cer instead on arma­ments. Why can’t we Christians live with other God’s chil­dren in peace and har­mony? Why must we need to have per­ceived ene­mies when we don’t need any? Who’s to judge oth­ers when this American Administration spends over 500 bil­lion dol­lars on the defence bud­get which is heck of a lot more than the Chinese are spending.

    Reply
  15. cheap kamas says:
    August 8, 2008 at 8:53 pm

    Hah, at that time, I was not a height of snake, and I also lost many cheap kamas because killed the snake.

    Reply
  16. buy cronous gold says:
    August 8, 2008 at 8:55 pm

    Moreover I could also be able to afford the things which I wanted to buy, and could buy cro­nous gold to give to oth­ers, I was very happy.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I've seen them to. Believe me, I hate those 19 just as much as...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      You are funny.
      Zandor
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Wow after reading these varied comments, I am surprised and educated. I...
      John
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      No one is saying that christains never do violent things we do all faiths...
      Valcan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Hey look its zandor trying to make people think this is a hate site or...
      Valcan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      It is sort of puzzeling that a room filled with highly trained US Army...
      Zandor
    • Keep it Simple
      Dear Big Daddy; Your last post is a laugh. You carried 100 lbs for 20 miles?...
      Zandor
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      All the Muslims in the USA should be immediately rounded up and shot. We...
      Zandor
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
      Yeah, and every president since Reagan has proposed a Mars...
      jmatt
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
      Awesome. Now to be a *real* military contract we have to spend $40...
      jmatt
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage