Home » News » Around the Globe » Mid Week Video: China’s Carrier Up-Close

Mid Week Video: China’s Carrier Up-Close

by John Reed on May 2, 2012

In case you haven’t seen this yet, its the first close-up video I’ve watched showing China’s aircraft carrier, the ex-Soviet Varyag, actually conducting any type of operations. In this case, she’s returning to port following her latest “scientific” cruise.

Click through the jump to enjoy. The close-up footage is toward the second half of the video.

Share |

{ 231 comments… read them below or add one }

Andy May 2, 2012 at 11:54 am

I hope Phillipine and Vietnam launch a few TORPEDOS at night and take care this JUNK.

Reply

Alexander May 2, 2012 at 12:01 pm

The PI armed forces lack the capability, and the will. Vietnam could, now that hey have purchased several Kilo class conventional boats.

Reply

Lance May 2, 2012 at 3:20 pm

The Philippines is correcting this finally after dumping there lousy President Alano They might be buying F-16s with Harpoon Anti-ship missiles that be more tan enough to take care of a fighter less Chicom Carrier.

Reply

Andy May 2, 2012 at 4:18 pm

They might be buying F-16s ….

FYI, THEY ASKING FOR FREE…

Reply

Papi1960R May 2, 2012 at 8:00 pm

After taking care of 350,000+ amer-asian children abandoned by irresponsible American military men over 50+ years we should give them a few Squadron of ex-AirGuard F-16s for free. Thats cheap. Hell throw in those really great performing, very inexpensive C-27 Spartans the USAF doesnt want to.

Lance May 2, 2012 at 11:56 pm

Id ask for free F-15As more than F-16s time for them to get a air force back after there lousy woman president gutted them in the 90s.

Nicky May 3, 2012 at 4:33 pm

I would say if they can't a used F-16, F-18 or F-15A, they can go to Russia and get a Mig 29, SU-27, MI-17. On top of that Russia can sell them a corvette to a used Destroyer. Russia needs the cash and the Philippines needs the hardware. It's a win win for them and to boot, if the Philippines has the cash, they get a couple of Kilo class SSK from Russia as well.

SANDMAN May 16, 2012 at 9:44 am

The Philippines wont be buying the F-16′s…..block 30 otherwise.
Cant afford to buy, cant afford to maintain. Even if the US government would give it for free, the Philippine government wont be able to buy parts. The Philippine Navy operates 2 obsolete ex US coast guard vessels, stripped down of everything except for the kitchen sink. Now they deploy them to the Spratley islands where they square off with chinese fishing boats! how pathetic!

SANDMAN May 16, 2012 at 9:44 am

The Philippines wont be buying the F-16′s…..block 30 otherwise.
Cant afford to buy, cant afford to maintain. Even if the US government would give it for free, the Philippine government wont be able to buy parts. The Philippine Navy operates 2 obsolete ex US coast guard vessels, stripped down of everything except for the kitchen sink. Now they deploy them to the Spratley islands where they square off with chinese fishing boats! how pathetic!

cs4 May 2, 2012 at 11:04 pm

President Alano?

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 4:10 pm

Andy. Lance & Alex. Vodka drinking & posting don't mix. You 3 must be drinking…..

Reply

Andy May 2, 2012 at 4:19 pm

@tiger…why do u think Russia dump this ship eh…

Reply

zap May 5, 2012 at 2:34 pm

Because Russia is not Ukraine

Reply

Alexander May 2, 2012 at 11:59 am

This series of short training deployments will continue for some time to come. Eventually, we will see flight ops, but that won't be anytime soon. The learning curve to turn this carrier and it's later to come air group into a weapon will take several years at the very least.

Reply

Joe America May 2, 2012 at 12:13 pm

This is nothing but a big dog on a leash to parade in the neighborhood.

Counter productive as it is sending all the neighbors into our camp.

If war took place, within 20 minutes this carrier would be visiting Davy Jones.

Reply

Vec May 2, 2012 at 12:16 pm

Good to be delusional.

Reply

DGR May 2, 2012 at 12:39 pm

Im not worried about this carrier, this one is a joke. The ones that will come are where we need to be focusing our worry. This is nothing but a training platform while they construct more.

Reply

Leroy May 2, 2012 at 12:19 pm

What the Chinese or Joe? Because with 14 active nuke carriers, and a lot of reserve Kitty Hawk class carriers that could be reactivated, my money is on the yanks! unless cut price toasters are now a form of weapon

Reply

blight_ May 2, 2012 at 1:23 pm

Constellation is reserve category X. America was expended as a target. JFK and Kitty Hawk are "in reserve", whatever that means.

Reply

Sgt_Buffy May 2, 2012 at 1:29 pm

That's still 11 carriers, and that ain't no small potatoes. It's blue chip to go USA.

Leroy, your comment only reminded me of MDK-2, Doctor's Radioactive Toast Launcher. lol.

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 4:31 pm

Museum hold status if somebody wants them.

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 4:20 pm

Lot of reserve carriers? I was just at the Reserve Basin at Phila last week. The JFK is going no place but a breakers yard. America was SinkEX'd & the Forrestal's are all waiting to be scrapped. So where is this reserve?

Reply

ziv May 2, 2012 at 5:58 pm

I wouldn't call them reserve carriers, but the Wasp and America class LHA's would ruin just about anyones day if they are carrying F35's. If you fully load the USS America with F35's and stage it alongside a Nimitz, you have a serious task force. Heck, even the America by itself is impressive albeit with a lot of weaknesses a Nimitz doesn't have.

Reply

Papi1960R May 2, 2012 at 8:07 pm

When/if(not my preference) Obama is re-elected in November we will draw down to a 140 ship navy with 6 carriers(3 East coast/3 West coast) . Then China can start a new round of purchasing Nuke powered, floating, hotels/casinos that just happen to have very large, flat recreation decks on top.

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 9:04 pm

A CVN can hold a lot of blackjack tables….

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 4:23 am

I think you got the wrong idea buddy! Obama is the one who is seriously looking after the threats of China and wanting to shift our focus toward Asia (countering China), Bush and the Republicans never do. Just like Mitt Romney, he just recently claimed that Russia is the biggest enemy of the US ever. Im sure China will laugh at this out loud. Cold War between US and the USSR is over, the USSR doesnt even exist no more, lets be realistic and recognize our true potential enemy. Like what I have raised in many posts, China is always the true threat.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 4:26 am

Also, if according to Papi, Obama shouldn't be reelected, then the one with the highest chance to be elected will be Mitt Romney, given what he claimed that Russia is our biggest enemy ever, im sure he will shift military focus toward Eastern Europe rather than Asia Pacific, now thats even more hilarious.

Reply

blight_ May 3, 2012 at 7:29 am

If Bush Jr thought China was too cool for Axis of Evil…

Additionally, Nixon and Reagan thought the same. Or at least liked China enough just to split them from the Soviets.

Reply

Praetorian May 3, 2012 at 11:28 am

2006 Quadrennial Defense Review during presidents Bush’s time,
was the start of the Navy’s 60 / 40 plan. 60% of the Navy’s assets in the Pacific and 40 % in the Atlantic. President Bush might not have been involved, but the Navy was already thinking about China. To say Bush didnt care about China as Kool Guy states, might be a stretch.
Giving president Obama all the credit for moving assets to the Pacific
would be a stretch as well.

Vec May 2, 2012 at 10:45 pm

The yanks have no money and borrowing from China.Have u place the wrong bet assuming u have any monies yourself?

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 3:14 pm

Nah, the Chinese are just gonna hire a few Taliban, and the Yanks are toast.

Reply

chris May 3, 2012 at 8:34 pm

Andy They will just think we did it? Besides we are done done no money we could not even keep a fly away. And the men are berd

Reply

Guest May 2, 2012 at 12:24 pm

just so China can feel extra-safe with their new capital flat top, the USN will soon get rid of all their HARPOON surf to surf missiles in our Navy.

Just in time, the USN is neutering itself.

Reply

blight_ May 2, 2012 at 1:20 pm

Harpoons aren't exactly high tech anymore. That said, we are definitely investing a ton in land attack at the expense of anti-ship capability.

Reply

matt May 2, 2012 at 8:57 pm

so whats the word on a replacement?

Reply

blight_ May 2, 2012 at 11:40 pm

http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Long_R

Allegedly in two years. Throw on two more years for pessimism.

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 4:37 pm

Maybe for the ship launched, the air launched I believe is going to be a variation of the JASSM and it's done.

Rohan May 2, 2012 at 12:35 pm

China's items: Use and throw !!!!

Chinese military : Kill, destroy and throw !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply

Sgt_Buffy May 2, 2012 at 1:41 pm

While it's good to be suspicious, has China been all that irresponsible with it's military? The news usually focuses on the Middle East and Africa, and I'm a bit out of date with Chinese Military history. How EXACTLY have they warranted our disrespect? Specific examples. I know they sent us faulty/bugged electronics, but we've also bugged merchandise before. Stolen tech? Guilty as charged, but look at WWII? What has China done that's so horrific as to validate our hatred towards them?
Cautiously
He known as Sgt. Buffy.

Reply

Kool Guy May 2, 2012 at 2:16 pm

China has been pretty aggressive since it became PRC, they are no longer the China that we know of during WWII. In the 1950s they confronted the US(a Superpower) in the Korean War, and that was only a few years after they united the country. Then in the 1970s they had the border clash with the Soviet Union, which mean they also confronted the other Superpower as well. Imagine in the 1950s and 1970s, thats only several years after uniting the country and they already dare to go all out with 2 Superpowers, what will they do in the future?. Today they already dare to claim all of South China Sea, which is an international water where the US 7th Fleet operate, next thing you know they will claim all of the Pacific Ocean to the point of the US West Coast, and dispute Hawaii with the US. It was a grave mistake that the US in the 1970s switched recognition to PRC in order to counter the Soviet Union even though the Soviet Union were obviously more calm and less aggressive than China. Conflicts between the US and USSR were mainly wars of words, and bigger ones get resolved by negotiation, China seem like they want to take everything out by means of force.

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 5:26 pm

Fear, my friend, fear is at the heart. The rest is ad hoc rationalization. The reasons for our loathing is our being scared shitless by China.

Reply

Poutine May 2, 2012 at 2:16 pm

potential conflict with taiwan, defending/supplying north korea, security council votes, claims to territory of allies in the island areas… then add in all the economic espionage, rising costs of f-35 (some attributable to secrets stolen by china), hmm… what else…?

wouldnt call it hatred, more of cautiously pissed

Reply

John Moore May 2, 2012 at 3:24 pm

They say one things do another.

They develop weapons who's sole purpose is to attack US assets.

More often than not they make the UN look like a toothless waste. Opposed to almost every resolution.

As for there enforcement of sanctions agreed to are ?able at best.

Reply

cs4 May 3, 2012 at 1:27 am

And the US made the B2 to plant crops, F22 for joyrides, aircraft carriers for cruises.

Reply

Jared May 2, 2012 at 8:50 pm

How about wars of conquest? They invaded and took over Tibet, they threaten to do the same to Taiwan and the Chinese have been oppressing or outright ethnic cleansing the ethnic populations of Xinjiang for 200+ years.

Reply

James May 7, 2012 at 3:44 pm

Dear SGT "buffy" …. Korean War… Nuff said…. STFU…

Reply

Musson May 2, 2012 at 1:47 pm

If we go to war with China – do we still have to pay off all the debt we owe them?

Just asking.

Reply

Kool Guy May 2, 2012 at 2:19 pm

Obviously we still do, but it wont be paying to the PRC but maybe ROC if we win, lol thats only if we win.

Reply

Hale May 2, 2012 at 9:08 pm

RoC doesn't hold much of our debt. China holds a bunch, and Japan and the UK each hold a bit as well. There's a list somewhere.

Reply

Kool Guy May 4, 2012 at 12:54 am

Lol you dont get it, stop trying to act smart with the stats of who owns the debts. Im saying if we win then ROC takes over China, and so if we do repay China it will be paying the ROC cuss now they are the new representative govt of China, in case if we win, get it?

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 1:43 am

LOL!!! I don't believe the US stands a chance fighting China within the 1st island chain, and perhaps even within the 2nd island chain. Nonetheless, the US can do no better than a MAD as the war escalates. Russia will take over the US, Japan and Europe. You should change your name to Kooless Guy, or better still, Klooless Guy. LOL!!!

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 4:40 pm

We don't have to do anything we don't want to, that opens up the conversation though to the insanity of a war between the US and China and how it would drive a stake through the heart of the world economy.

Reply

Kool Guy May 4, 2012 at 12:56 am

"We dont have to do anything we dont want to" that means we dont have to repay our debt? then what will happen to our credibility? our country will become a wild jungle and no one will want to cooperate. Look at the moment when S&P lowered US credit, it already sent a shock to the whole world.

Reply

STemplar May 4, 2012 at 2:26 am

I think credit ratings and interest rates would be the least of anyone's concern if the US and China went to war with one another.

Reply

Kool Guy May 4, 2012 at 2:46 pm

sure during the war no one care, how bout after the war, thats the question of the original post.

blogger May 2, 2012 at 2:21 pm

I wonder why ppl always talk about chinese army so low. the only "modern" war the usa won was the second world war, and they won only with allies. even germany would be a better enemy in 1v1. what happened since then?

korea – truce/lost
vietnam – lost
iraq – lost, not a single objective was completed
afganistan – lost badly

I didn't count the succesful coups of democratic states in latin america, where the us made coups only because they didnt like the elections' outcome in the cold war

china proved:
- they can shot down us military satellites in a day. gps and gps weapons gone…
- they can send all us ships down to davy jones with their DF anti ship missiles around the chinese soil

like it or not but china would be a very tough enemy in a conflict with usa.

Reply

Josh May 2, 2012 at 2:52 pm

Your lack of understanding and ignorance is almost humorous. You forgot the Gulf War, Grenada, and plenty of other conflicts in which U.S. went in along with our allies and more than accomplished our objectives. And if you believe that we got whooped in iraq and afghanistan, you must really buy into the liberal media. Last time i checked, al queda is nearly defeated as an organization, and within months after 9/11, special forces and coalition air strikes nailed majority of the taliban threats. Bringing those two nations into a democratic nation isnt something that happens over night, so if that makes it a failure thenyou got me. Know your facts first though.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 6:13 pm

LOL!!! Pathetic misinformed sheeple. Bragging about beating Grenada?? Why not brag about eating a banana raw?!!!

Reply

passingnowhere May 4, 2012 at 2:50 pm

passingby, then why not brag about your mom having sex with me last night?

Reply

passingby May 5, 2012 at 12:38 pm

LOL. Taking lessons with Mossad, Josh?? How many Palestinians and American protestors is Israel arresting, torturing, or killing a day, Josh?

Praetorian May 2, 2012 at 3:38 pm

How can Korea be a loss ?? I thought South Korea was invaded by North Korea. Since South Korea is still there and having the 15th rated economy to boot, I would put that as a win. Where is North Korea on the GDP list ?
Also the Iraq war 1, should read win, every objactive completed. Not to mention the U.S. destroyed the 4th largest standing army, at the time in 1991.
The DF-21D that you speak of, I dont think is deployed & have never heard of a test being completed on it.
I do agree with your other staement :

like it or not but china would be a very tough enemy in a conflict with usa

Reply

passingby May 5, 2012 at 12:22 pm

fuzzy logic all around. This one stands out: quote: "The DF-21D that you speak of, I dont think is deployed & have never heard of a test being completed on it."

LOL. By that line of reasoning, if you have never heard of the Milky Way, it doesn't exist. You might want to patent this Peetorian form of self-flattery.

Reply

Praetorian May 6, 2012 at 1:03 am

Lol, took you three days to reply, how did you find everything on wikipedia so fast ?

Reply

passingby May 8, 2012 at 7:49 am

Wikipedia??? LOL. I don't need wikipedia to see and point out your fallacious argument. This is about your faulty reasoning process, not the underlying claim, be it true or false.

I don't check the site specifically for your posts and replies, but I guess you are just showing off your skills in Peetorian self-flattery.

tiger May 2, 2012 at 4:33 pm

Bull……

Reply

Kool Guy May 2, 2012 at 5:44 pm

Its funny how you listed the Chinese capabilities that you claimed will be invincible in case of any war, those capabilities are by far already developed by the US long long before China ever have, then the Chinese play the catch up game. 2nd of all, you tell China to use their satellites missile shooting capabilities against countries like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan and see how effective it will be. Lmao those countries dont even have satellites, whats good of satellites missiles? Speaking of anti ship missiles, the US got more than that of that. But wait, in 1960s when the US gets involved in Vietnam, does the North even have a Navy for the USN to use their missiles? i dont think so. Even in 2003 when the US invaded afghanistan there was no afghan navy to resist, USN ships were basically out there wide open in the sea shore firing missiles into afghan and iraq freely, So even if China got anti ship missile, what use of it against countries like Iraq and Afghanistan? your comparing irrelevant things together, doesnt make sense, Its like im saying a mathematician is smarter than a physicist.

Reply

Andy May 2, 2012 at 6:41 pm

china proved: ??????? what.

copy and paste ?
products JUNKS.

Reply

Andy May 2, 2012 at 6:57 pm

Remember 1st Gulf war Sadam have the latest tech. and Tomahawks jammer from Russia …..look what happen with the Tomahawks ? do they misses the Targets ?

remmeber Kosavol war ? Tomahawks does misses the target and land on China embassy?? name one thing that China can design in defense ?? everything China have are COPY from Russia.

Reply

Hale May 2, 2012 at 9:15 pm

The difference is is that China really hasn't fought a 'real war' since Vietnam (that's right, they fought Vietnam right after we did).

China would be a touch enemy if we fought over Taiwan, which is what their entire force is designed to do. If they fought anywhere else, it would be a lot easier. We would, ironically, be able to steam roll them using superior numbers. As long as we never set foot on Chinese soil, we'll win.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 1:34 am

That's a really bad analysis with lots of misconceptions.

Reply

blight_ May 3, 2012 at 7:33 am

The entire force isn't designed for Taiwan. Looking at their lack of amphibious forces and a continental style army suggests this. The increase in SSM's across from Taiwan is a deterrent against independence, which is working for now.

Reply

Hale May 3, 2012 at 12:51 pm

Lack of amphibious forces?
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.225/

If you've seen some of China's recent wargames, you'd realize that China is focusing very heavily on amphibious landings, the one in 2009 demonstrated this fact. It's that China's all about amphibious tanks and para-dropped tanks. China's got ZTD-05s and ZBD-05s which, like our canceled EFV program, uses water pump jets to propell these IFVs at great speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ships_of_the_People%

Sure, China doesn't have that many amphibious assault ships now, but they're building them. All the pieces aren't in place yet, but you can bet that one day they'll be fully prepared to invade Taiwan.

However, their deterrence against independence is more economical these days. When you get 300,000 tourists a year from the mainland and all your suppliers are over there and all your products are being sold their, you'll definitely want to hang onto the status quo. All those troops and missiles are just another factor to convince Taiwan that they shouldn't try to rock the boat.

Reply

Vec May 2, 2012 at 10:21 pm

Thanks for telling the truth without biasness or racialism.

Reply

Bill May 3, 2012 at 11:46 am

The Vietnam War was a war of logistics and expense – the goal was bankrupt the Soviets who were supplying the Vietcong with weapons, the US proved that it could supply a war halfway around the world while being, relatively, in Russia's backyard.

The main reason the US was trying to root out communism wasn't because we think communism is inherently evil, its the baggage of anti-American sentiment that comes with communism.

Reply

Kool Guy May 4, 2012 at 2:48 pm

you've got some correct argument at the end, but did you mean its the baggage of anti-communism?

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 5:10 pm

While the Soviets were supplying lots of military hardware to the North, the cost didn't come close to the fortune the US was throwing out in the war. It was the US that was getting bankrupted in the process. The only beneficiary was (I know you don't like to hear it) the US military industrial complex.

By the way, the NSA has released study documents on the Gulf of Tonkin incident – it was a false flag. The president at the time was a known corrupt, murderous crook named Lyndon B Johnson, with close connections to military-industrial. A coincidence?

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 5:11 pm

edit: (last sentence) … connections to the military-industrial complex.

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 4:51 pm

How is Korea a loss? UN res 84 was achieved.

We left Vietnam and are now forging military ties with them to oppose the Chinese.

Iraq, Hussein is dead, seems like a pretty good objective to me. Things aren't settled in Iraq but pronouncements about victory or loss are overwhelmingly premature for both Iraq and Stan.

Pray tell what is a victory in Stan and Iraq?

You say WW2 was won and yet the mess we have in the middle east is preciesly because there was not a lot of long term thinking done about the middle east at the conclusion of WW2.

China did not prove they can shoot down US military satellites, that is a fallacy. They shot down one of their own weather satellites from a land based system. The US followed up with a on the fly shoot down of one our own failing spy satellites from the sea, no points there.

The above post also relates to the fact the US will inflict far more damage to Chinese space based ISR than they will to us and without their satellites they aren't going to hit anything with their ASBM's except the Pacific ocean. To say nothing of the fact the US is deploying a host of redundant systems to insure OTH connectivity.

I think a lot of people like to paint the Chinese as a bigger obstacle than they are to justify $400 billion dollar aircraft programs. Frankly a couple three thousand TLAM and JASSM strikes at their commercial and petroleum infrastructure on their coastline and China is the new Africa.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 6:14 pm

let me summarize your post for those short on time: BS (end of summary)

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 7:24 pm

Let me summarize your summarizing, moonie kook, go get some meds you nut.

Reply

blogger May 2, 2012 at 3:02 pm

911 was a controlled demoltion of the buildings. al qaida was just 'let' to flew those planes into them. there are a million proofs for that from the sprites to the thermite what made the steel structure melt

more and more isaf troops die from day to day in afanistan, and right after the allies withdraw the country will be worse than before

iraqi operation is a fail. iran's first move in a conflict will be to invade it in a case of war, if they wont make a satellite nation of theirs

the whole terror thing is an artifical thingy to justify laws and targeted killings all around the world. more civilians died from us drones than because of local militias in some places.

gulf war was not an all out war, as the allied forces didn't want to escalate it. majority of iraqi army remained. but surely usa could won there without allies too, just like in some other parts of the world too. but tat doesnt change the fact that china could be an ultimate opponent in a future comflict if happens.

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 4:35 pm

Above post confirms dumbass status.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 12:55 am

sorry, have to stand firm on this one – anyone who believes the official 9-11 story is a dumbass, not necessarily because he/she lacks the intelligence to see through the cover-up, as blind faith in a murderous US government and the corrupt mainstream media can be equally effective in stupefying an individual.

9-11 was an inside job (false flag operation). Tower 1, tower 2 and building 7 were ALL brought down by explosives.

You are insulting your own intelligence by refusing to look at the evidence.

Reply

chris May 3, 2012 at 6:16 am

Ha Ha Ha.

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 11:03 pm

Kook

Reply

Kool Guy May 2, 2012 at 5:37 pm

if the allies withdrew and the country's security gets worse that means allies' troops were effective.

Reply

blogger May 2, 2012 at 5:40 pm

effectiveness is not equal with victory.

Reply

Praetorian May 2, 2012 at 6:13 pm

Can there really be a ” victory ‘ in an occupation.

Reply

blight_ May 2, 2012 at 6:50 pm

Well, a prolonged occupation. We could be there forever if we really wanted to, and what would change…

Matrix3692 May 3, 2012 at 10:15 am

hold on, hold on, i thought this is a defense technology forum website, why the **** are we talking about 9/11 conspiracy to deepwater horizon incident?

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 10:32 pm

one reason can be stated in the form of a question: How do you (or what technology can you use) to defend yourself against murder schemes (among others) by people in your own federal government?

Why is that Dick Cheney, who unprecedentedly had assumed command of NORAD and ordered stand down on 9-11, not subjected to criminal investigation for the death of 3000 Americans??

Reply

Matrix3692 May 4, 2012 at 9:47 am

sorry, but i didn’t feel the same way you do, cause primary i’m not an american and to be honest i’m more interested in military technology than politics, so do you mind i END this politics session?

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 5:25 pm

the demolitions of WTC 1, 2 & 7 involved pretty sophisticated military technology, planning and logistics.

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 11:04 pm

Because Kooks like passingby aren't banned in a timely manner by the mods.

Reply

William C. May 4, 2012 at 2:49 am

Yessir. Clearly the CIA or whoever secretly brought in thousands of pounds of explosives and set those up when nobody was looking.

That certainly makes far more sense than the impact of a 767 and resulting fire weakening the structure enough to result in a collapse. /sarcasm

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 3:03 am

it absolutely makes far more sense than the BS about 767 and fire from jet fuel, unless laws of physics ceased to exist for the US on 9-11.

how far did you go in school?

Reply

STemplar May 4, 2012 at 3:33 am

Yah William, that BS 767 that was on live TV that hundreds of millions of people saw. What are you, stupid? The CIA having to string thousands and thousands of feet of blast wire, weaken supports, bore holes in the walls for charges and keep the 50,000 daily workers from noticing that work for the weeks it would have taken makes way more sense, you tool..

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 4:12 am

Oh look, STumpler is pretending to be a demolition expert now. LOL. Yeah, I'm sure the CIA can use some advice from you, who have been so successful in demolishing yourself, without using an inch of "blast wire" or an ounce of explosives. LOL!!!

ltfunk May 2, 2012 at 3:22 pm

Yep and then after we lose we have to pay reparations on top of it.

Though if you watch our Secretary of State's 6 monthly visits to Bejing to beg largess to keep our economy afloat, its pretty clear who won WW3

Reply

Belesari May 2, 2012 at 4:38 pm

We own the vast majority of our debt.

WW3 isnt over yet. And irronicly the US is still being invested in by other nations and entities. You see we are stable in a way most arent.

Reply

Hale May 2, 2012 at 9:17 pm

Exactly, only like 10% of debt is owned by China. Most debt is owned by the American people.

Reply

Lance May 2, 2012 at 3:22 pm

The site is overestimating PRC's military capability. Yes they have a carrier but they lack planes for it now they dont have a integrated defense for the ship they lack the technology to make it a real threat now.

Reply

DGR May 2, 2012 at 4:12 pm

Again, this carrier is a joke, we got that. The new ones they are building are what we need to be focused on. This is nothing more than a training platform for there new ships when they come online in the future. Same exact thing as how the US Navy stood up a carrier force, had a few training ships to learn the concept, then went full hog wild once they learned what they actually needed.

Reply

Andy May 2, 2012 at 5:28 pm

@dgr
China will never be able to learn, they are good with copy and paste…..

Reply

Mike May 2, 2012 at 7:38 pm

Thius is China's "Langley". Baby steps. In 20 years…quien sabe??

Reply

Andy May 2, 2012 at 8:30 pm

for the last 100 years China still copy and paste, we'll wait for another 20 more years to see what happen ?.

Vec May 2, 2012 at 10:38 pm

America is so learned and therefore is near bankrupt.Fantastic.Learn and beg is the new motto.

Reply

Vec May 2, 2012 at 10:42 pm

America is so learned and knowleagble and is a near bankrupt and borrower .Ironical and funny and delusional and Hilary always going to China and not the other way round.

Reply

cs4 May 3, 2012 at 12:39 am

America will never learn, they are good with creating enemies and collateral damage.

Reply

Matrix3692 May 4, 2012 at 9:38 am

i think if you would just read some history other than what’s on your text book or newspaper, you would found that the chinese are quite good in creativity along the entire line of civilization, just that they didn’t had the habit of documenting the inventions properly until the last couple hundred years, so many inventions is ‘lost’ and ‘reinvented’ during the chinese history.

Reply

mpower6428 May 2, 2012 at 4:51 pm

THATS COSMO, he's chinese*

Reply

Belesari May 2, 2012 at 11:33 pm

I gave you a thumbs down for the simple fact that made no sense lol.

Reply

mpower6428 May 3, 2012 at 12:43 am

one day all of you will finally see "boogy nights"…. im still waiting.

Reply

Marcus May 2, 2012 at 7:53 pm

People, people, people….China can’t win a war against the U.S. Why? China doesn’t have the natural resources to substain a war. China doesn’t have the military infastructure the US does. If you say we lost the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, you are wrong! I was there in Iraq and Afghanistan. Seems to me like we achieve our objectives. Our hands were tied in Iraq and Afghanistan. We steam rolled into both countries and we occupied them. Were we driven back…NO! We didn’t even use our FULL capabilities there in Iraq and Afghanistan..why? Because we were trying to limit civilian casualties. If we were to go to the war with China, we would unleash our WHOLE arsenal against them. Our military infastructure is VAST and it is way more advanced than China. We can get troops to anywhere in the world on a moments notice.

Reply

Hale May 2, 2012 at 9:19 pm

'nleash our WHOLE arsenal against them'.

Sounds like nuclear war to me.

In which case, everyone loses.

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 9:31 pm

yeah, ok…

Reply

Vec May 2, 2012 at 10:39 pm

China has nothing and America is near bankrupt and China debtor.Ironical?

Reply

guest May 3, 2012 at 2:21 am

What objectives did you achieve in Iraq & Afghanistan the only objective you achieved was to to destabilise both countries which after you have left will probebly lead to civil war in both countries.

Reply

Dan May 6, 2012 at 10:20 pm

Normally, history shows that the only way to *win* a war is through the introduction of ground forces. This was not the case during WWII against the Japanese. Two nuclear weapons and continued incendiary bombings did the trick. Neither would prove the be-all and/or end-all in a war with China. Yes, technically the US is still decades ahead of the Chinese. Ultimately that will change as both country's military budgets go in opposite directions. War between both countries would be *MAD* indeed and neither side would win. The devastation would be so vast, I'm not sure what the term *winning* would mean. It is beyond comprehension. Let us hope that both countries realize their strength lies in maintaining peace rather than allowing war. We didn't win in Vietnam. We didn't lose either. We left. The same applies to Iraq and will also apply to Afghanistan. In all three situations, the US created its own definition of *winning*, applied that definition then raised our hands in victory. Surely any one who's been to war can both see and understand this.

Reply

Pat May 2, 2012 at 8:15 pm

What to say, what to say…

Reply

Guest May 2, 2012 at 8:54 pm

Yes i have something to say
China can win a war against USA
Using the most fast and devastating missile that there >>> SS-N-22s Sunburn or an stealth and hypersonic missile can wipeout a entire U.S navy fleet
There is no defense for this missile at the moment

Reply

Chuck May 6, 2012 at 4:11 am

We already use a similar Russian missile, the Coyote, to test our missile defenses, so I don't think the SS-N-22 Sunburn would be much of a threat. In fact, the Coyote is smaller, and just as fast so I imagine it would be actually harder to hit than a Sunburn. Of course, if you don't know what you are talking about, then it is easy to make these mistakes.

Reply

Liam May 13, 2012 at 10:30 pm

Yes and those ships and subs equipi with those SunBurns will be the first targets for the USN sub force and B-2 Stealth bombers. The US knows what the threats are and will make sure there taken care of before they send in the big wigs. Oh and the F-22 will make quick scrap of those mighty Tu-16 look-a-like bombers China has so many off.

Reply

Belesari May 2, 2012 at 11:36 pm

OK just so everyone in the world figures this out. You know those russian people? Well they used to be called the soviet union. Those Super missiles……yea the russians had something like that awhile back…..thats why we built tyco's and DDG's….

Reply

Joel May 3, 2012 at 1:12 am

The chinese can't even make safe baby formula. And when was the last time they showed any military ability, never mind pushing around the Nepalese or the Tibetans.

Reply

cs4 May 3, 2012 at 3:49 am

I was wondering who handled the E. coli tainted food which people in your country died? And by showing your military might, how many of your countrymen you want to see dead, dying or wounded?

Reply

Snuffy Smith May 3, 2012 at 8:37 am

Never underestimate an opponent, no matter who they are.

Reply

asf May 3, 2012 at 10:39 am

China's military is largely defensive in nature; they have chosen to use the 5.8mm round. They chose this because of its penetration characteristics, but also if they were invaded, the invasion force wouldn't be able to use local chinese ammunition if they could not be supplied.

On the flip side, if China invaded anyone, they wouldn't be able to use local ammunition, but since it is largely a defensive force, this is not a disadvantage for them. From here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIMqvU0mnpY
6:00 onwards

Reply

Hale May 3, 2012 at 9:37 pm

I would say that this is mostly valid.

If you look at their spending, most things point towards Taiwan, as well as modernizing it's Navy, but a ton of money also goes into paramilitary forces.

China lacks tanker planes, China lacks long-range bombers, China can barely send a few ships to protect cargo ships from Somoli pirates. They're not a really offensive military. Russia's military might be in much poorer state than the Chinese military, but they have the first two.

Reply

blight_ May 3, 2012 at 9:54 pm

Of course, the Russian navy has plenty of ships to spend money on, and has a large amount of funds committed to the SSBN fleet. The PLAN is somewhere flexible in their spending.

That said, when the Russkies dump their Typhoons, will the PLAN bite? 'cause that would be interesting…

Reply

dan May 6, 2012 at 10:58 pm

Are you suggesting that China would win either an offensive or defensive war based on the size bullets they are manufacturing?
Surely you jest!

Reply

Chuck May 3, 2012 at 12:13 pm

War with chine interesting i think the way you should think about it business is war, not war is business. The Chinese will not go to war with the US for two reason, one its bad for business two its bad for business enough said, 400 million middle class, over 2,000 billionars and millionars some of them Military Commanders Really?

Reply

Hale May 3, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Tienong May 23, 2012 at 8:33 pm

Chinese will not go to war with the US. Because with one reason only: they are cowed, they only go after smaller countries like Philippine, Vietnam…

Reply

duuude May 3, 2012 at 12:20 pm

I, for one, welcome our new Oriental Overlords.

Reply

Hale May 3, 2012 at 9:32 pm

I don't, but I'm even sure if they'd want to rule over us.

Reply

Tribulationtime May 3, 2012 at 1:03 pm

I actually don´t know what hell it is stopping them to fully operational condition.
All gentlemens in this room know that put one Battleship from museum to fight takes 10-12 minutes.

Reply

cozine May 3, 2012 at 1:56 pm

:) You noticed that too?

Nothing ON EARTH can stop the U.S. military now, only aliens, transformers and nazi from moon are worthy of our attention.

Reply

Hale May 3, 2012 at 9:29 pm

Exactly. Every time someone complains of how small the US armed forces are, I respond that they are designed to fight two Soviet Unions at once in total war, not a couple thousand towel-heads in bumblefuckistan.

Reply

blight_ May 3, 2012 at 3:15 pm

This is the part where we all chuckle at your great humor…right?

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm

Yeah, it'd take 10-12 minutes alright, to sink the fucking battleship, you fockface retard!

Reply

That guy May 3, 2012 at 2:08 pm

If china mil hardware is as tough as their toys, it doesn't stand a chance….

Reply

cs4 May 4, 2012 at 1:27 am

And you are the director of advanced weaponry in China?

Reply

Ted May 3, 2012 at 2:20 pm

Wojna to pieniądze a wy Amerykanie jesteście bankrutami . Chiny wygrały!

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 10:05 pm

Chiny muszą usunąć dolara jako waluty rezerwowej przed zwycięstwem jest kompletny.

Reply

Edward Frugone May 3, 2012 at 3:25 pm

In II WW — due to lack of logistics — it took the allies two weeks to accept the surrender of only a few million germans.

The chinese population is 1.3 billion people, they will have 100 million in the military fighting back and 100 million surrendering.

Do we have enough soldiers to watch over 100million prisionsrs and enough food, medicine, blankets and hospitals to care for their wounded. We don´t need the chinese as enemies .If we can´t beat them its best to join them !!

Reply

Belesari May 3, 2012 at 8:31 pm

By join do do you mean bow down to a people who forcably sterile the Blind and others?

China is much worse than what people hear about. It has alot of terrible problems and really doesnt give a damn about its people. The communist part has basicly turned into a new nobility.

BTW a 100,000,000 man army is bullshit. They dont have that many. Even if they did they couldnt feed it nor supply it and the entire country would starve to death. The US wouldnt occupy simply destroy and leave.

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 10:28 pm

"By join do do you mean bow down to a people who forcably sterile the Blind and others? "

Funny that, since we did to Black people in this country. But hey, since you don't think African Americans are humans anyway, right? Riiight, you fucktard!

Reply

Realist May 3, 2012 at 8:17 pm

China has around 1 Billion 360 Million People. The US has about 340 Million People.
In the next 10 years China has to produce about 340 Million Jobs for their growing population. If they do not, the people will revolt. China does not want war, they want markets for there products (including military arms). They want land for their crops, and they have the money to buy it.
They do want Tiawan, and if they sent some of there Million Man Army over, We could not stop them. They would occupy before we could react. But, that would be bad for business.

Reply

Belesari May 3, 2012 at 8:38 pm

We could stop them. Tiawan is a island. A insanely well fortified island. Sink those ships and destroy those transport they are dead. US arrives along with the Japanese, South Koreans and half the pacific.

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 10:32 pm

First of all, its TAIWAN, not TIAWAN, you fuckface retard!

Second of all, those flattops of ours wouldn't survive inside a day, OK? Trust me, you are a dumbass, and I am much, much, much, much better informed and more intelligent than you.

Your post betrays you as a dimwitted redneck shitface. Go fuck your sister, you fucktard!

Reply

Thomas L. Nielsen May 4, 2012 at 4:46 am

"….I am much, much, much, much better informed and more intelligent than you."

Considering the amount of abuse and name-calling in your post, and the complete lack of supporting evidence, I have significant doubts about the veracity of that statement.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 10:35 pm

Belesari, are you posting from inside the library of a school for the mentally handicapped?

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 11:06 pm

Yes, he's two aisles over from you.

Reply

tiger May 4, 2012 at 7:19 pm

LOL

Jeff May 4, 2012 at 10:32 pm

No, he's posting from the school of disabled dickheads.

Reply

Abosolute May 14, 2012 at 12:28 am

China is currently on its way to its peak of power. China is a businessman with a communist streak which makes it a very shrewd businessman. The rest of the Democratic world like from where i come from have "resolve". Like all businesses China will eventually wane. Maybe not today but it will. Resolve to stop aggression if there will be overt or covert is up to Uncle Sam, NATO and their allies. I am sure somewhere along the line before anything fires up something will happen that will makes small the significance of the Chinese threat. If not there is always wishing for bird flu.

Reply

passingby May 14, 2012 at 3:16 am

Wrong on all counts.

Reply

we2rborg May 22, 2012 at 2:06 am

If anyone seriously thinks China wants to wage a war against the biggest warmongering nation on the planet, they must be kidding.
They can probably afford to BUY the USA.

Reply

True WARRIOR August 11, 2012 at 7:12 pm

fuck china n fuck their bullshit toys, n everything else they make.Third class rated shit.

Reply

tiger August 11, 2012 at 9:35 pm

True moron is more likely. Beer muscle posters say silly things.

Reply

blight_ May 2, 2012 at 6:52 pm

The original point is that structural steel is allegedly too strong to collapse in a simple fuel fire. Then again, Deepwater Horizon fell apart and sank from a fire/explosion caused only by hydrocarbon ignition.

I guess if the building had just toppled in one direction it would've settled the matter quite nicely.

That said, there's still that question about the Alfred P Murrah building and whether or not ammonium nitrate (without fuel oil) would've done what it did to the building.

Reply

tiger May 2, 2012 at 9:30 pm

Melting is not needed. Loss of load bearing is more important.

Reply

Mike May 2, 2012 at 7:35 pm

tell that to the survivors of the fires aboard the Franklin, Oriskany, Forrestal, and Enterprise…I'm sure they'd be interested in your views.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 1:15 am

Deepwater Horizon involved explosions. Not comparable to structural steel used in skyscrapers. There have been bigger fires lasting over 24 hours, and none of those buildings collapsed.

Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC lease, appeared on TV and expressly said that "someone" had made the decision to pull building 7 because the NYFD "might not be able to contain the fire"

He later realized that he had screwed up big time and made a boneheaded spin that he was referring to "firemen", even though his exact words were abundantly clear that he was referring to pulling building 7.

I guess we can take Silverstein's spin as a double dare – "yeah, we took them down with explosives, and I've got a 7 billion judgment in my pocket; what are you gonna do about it."

Amazing how the numerous explosions clearly present in all the audio / video tapes are making any difference to the average American observers. Not even when the firemen and the police on site were making such observations.

Again, thumbs up for the US propaganda machine.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 1:26 pm

ok structural steel, let me ask you. How is the steel supposed to be melt then if someone wants to reproduce that steel? keep on heating it rite? Well in case of a fire, if the fire keeps on running and no one can stop the fire then structural steel will melt too. What you mean it can stand fuel fire, but for how long? Remember, during the 911, 2001. The twins tower each had 200+ stories building. The NYC fire department only had equipment to go up to level 80 something to rescue people and stop the fire. Therefore, the fire was just there and no one could really stop the fire so structural steel ended up melting. Ask Japan, they would know. They build most of their buildings with ability to stand earthquake, but looks what happened this time.

Reply

blight_ May 2, 2012 at 7:39 pm

The carriers that did sink in WW2, often had issues due to uncontrollable fuel fires.

Reply

Vec May 2, 2012 at 10:46 pm

Exactly like the yanks.No funds.Philippine should learn from America and borrow from China as well.

Reply

Nicky May 3, 2012 at 4:35 pm

If I were Russia, now would be a good time to make a sales pitch to the Philippines and see if the Philippines is interested in the latest and greatest Russian military hardware including Mig-29, SU-27, Corvettes, Frigates and even a Couple of Kilo class SSK.

Reply

Curtis R Freese May 2, 2012 at 10:53 pm

If you looked at the make / model / and porpulsen. They get a russian leave behind, they buy m-15s and kill baby girls. We only need to wait till the testoeron level hits HOMO-China they all die off and we got all the rice land KFC can feed

Reply

CurtisRFreese May 2, 2012 at 10:58 pm

Vec Why don't you do what your mother must have tried. POST APORSITION drinks and a drive on hwy 10 , about 100 mph into dad

Reply

Belesari May 2, 2012 at 11:32 pm

Stable in that we have the largest energy reserves on the planet. Stable in that two parties that hate eachother can justpass the most power in the world off because WE the people say so…..

THAT is stable.

Reply

Belesari May 2, 2012 at 11:32 pm

Oh and btw China and most of europe infact most of the nations on earth are in debt to someone.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 1:17 am

damn me. edit 5th parag: Amazing how the numerous explosions clearly present in all the audio / video tapes AREN'T making any difference …

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 2:14 am

I used to think that you were a technical guy, one who had gone through some grueling drills in mathematics, physics, and more importantly, logical / analytic reasoning. I guess you are not.

What part of free fall do you not understand? Is it even remotely conceivable that a fire at, say, level 80 and above, could somehow "weaken" the steel structure of the entire building (Ground to level 79) to the point that it couldn't even offer SOME resistance??? You are in effect saying that the entire steel frame of the building was suddenly melted. But the that's clearly NOT the case, as there were plenty of straight H beams on those trucks during the astonishingly PROMPT clean up (or more accurately, evidence destroying) phrase.

Do the fine dust and pulverized concrete not mean anything?? Do the fine metal droplets, residues of thermite and thermate not mean anything?? The angled cuts on the H beams were just a coincidence? The sound of numerous explosions in various videos was all fake?

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 3:33 am

Consider a simple high school level physics problem (I'm making this problem up on the fly but it's a lot simpler than those I had to solve when I was about 13 or 14.)

Suppose 10 identical thin metal plates each of mass m (> 0) and dimensions 1m x 1m x (negligible thickness) are suspended in the air by some magical force, forming a vertical stack at 1 meter interval. Each plate remains stationary until the plate above hits it, at which point it's free to fall instantaneously.

(a) If the lowest plate is 1 meter above the ground, and the top plate starts to drop at time t=0, how long does it take for the lowest plate to hit the ground?

(b) Repeat the problem for 80 plates at 1 meter interval.

(c) Repeat the problem for 80 plates at 3 meter interval.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 2:16 am

DAMN ME. Edit: last sentence in 2nd parag should read:

But that's clearly NOT the case, as there were plenty of straight H beams on those trucks during the astonishingly PROMPT clean up (or more accurately, evidence destroying) phase.

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 11:15 pm

There were no structural support beams in WTC, each floor was bolted to the exterior shell and the actual outside walls are what provided support.

Reply

tiger May 4, 2012 at 7:12 pm

So when did this team of demolition experts wire 2 whole occupied office towers? I Never said stuff melted. Prompt Clean up? It took months.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 3:38 am

As usual, let g be the force of gravity. Ignore air resistance. For (c) the distance between the lowest plate and the ground is 3 meters.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 6:09 pm

This is a defense tech forum. Anyone with SOME technical / engineering / science background here??

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 9:01 pm

Sigh …. I guess most people would rather be chewing cheese burgers and French fries than think about this problem.

I'm going to do the first few steps of part (c) using a more realistic interval / floor height – 3.8 meters instead of 3 meters. This is obtained by dividing WTC tower 1 roof height 417m into 110 floors.

There is no opposite motions in this problem, so downward momentum is taken as positive.

At time t = 0, velocity of top plate V0 is 0. Acceleration due to gravity is g. The velocity of the top plate after falling 3.8 meters (1 floor) right before impact with 2nd plate (or upon impact BUT before change of velocity due to impact) is given by:

square(V1b) = square(V0) + 2g(3.8)

So, V1b = sqrt(7.6g)

Momentum before impact = mass*velocity = m*sqrt(7.6g)

Velocity of 2 combined plates immediately after impact is:

V1a = m*sqrt(7.6g) / 2m …. (by the Law of Conservation of Momentum)

So, V1a = sqrt(7.6g) / 2

Time T1 taken to fall through the 1st interval is given by:

V1b = V0 + g*T1, therefore

T1 = V1b / g = sqrt(7.6g) / g.

That ends the calculations for the 1st interval.

The velocity of the 2 falling plates right before impact with the 3rd plate is given by:

square(V2b) = square(V1a) + 2g(3.8)

so, V2b = sqrt( square(V1a) +2g(3.8) )

Velocity of the combined 3 plates immediately after impact is:

V2a = (2/3)*V2b ….. (again, by the Law of Conservation of Momentum.)

Time T2 taken to fall through the 2nd interval is:

V2b = V1a + g*T2

T2 = (V2b – V1a) / g

T3, T4 … Tn can calculated similarly. The Total Time is

TT = T1 + T2 + T3 + … + T80

= (V1b/2 + V2b/3 + V3b/4 + V4b/5 + … + V79b/80 + V80b) / g …. after some simplification if I did it correctly.

The final value for TT would have been the time it would have taken the towers to fall had there been absolutely no resistance except for the change of velocity at each impact due to the law of conservation of momentum. Even with this outlandish assumption, TT would be a lot longer than the actual time taken by the collapse of Tower 1 or Tower 2. Therefore the 9-11 commission's "pancake theory" is pure BS, as it contradicts results obtained by applying the laws of physics.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 6:40 am

oops, edit: let g be the gravitational constant.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 6:50 am

g ~= 9.8 meter per second squared (the approx. value of acceleration due to gravity. if I remember correctly)

Reply

Peter Wiggins May 3, 2012 at 9:39 am

"There have been bigger fires lasting over 24 hours, and none of those buildings collapsed". Name one, pretty please, you windbag.

Reply

@GONZ0HUNTER May 3, 2012 at 1:02 pm

apartment fire in glendale Co 2008ish? i was there plus about 500 other fires that year…stfu

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 2:54 pm

do yourself a big favor – watch the videos I've posted. Get your parents to watch them with you if possible.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 1:33 pm

And? all those stuffs about the media is your BS?

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 1:45 pm

You dont get the point, If you look at any year you would see that the Pacific operations cost a lot for the Navy as the 7th fleet has been the biggest foward operation fleet in the USN, even before Bush. If you read and study some true policies under the Bush administration, you would see that for the 8 years that Bush was in office, he never publicly criticize China military might, or question it, or do something in countering it. During that 8 years, all that he ever criticize or question of China is about human rights issue, which China pretty much dont give a crap. Look at a different example, Bush administration stayed quiet about what China did in the South China Sea (claiming it all, and start arresting neighbors' boats that travel around the public sea). Its kinda like giving the world a message, we the US will be neutral, whatever China do we dont care. When Obama came to power we see a different message, Obama and a few other cab. members claimed that the US have the rights to resolve issue in the South China Sea, and something like its in our national interest to solve it, and began arming some of the neighbors thats in dispute with China. It shows a more clear message, and it also serve as a hold back on China. I dont see Bush doing that.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 1:49 pm

Also, if you think that the Republicans party is really going after China, then please explain why would Mitt Romney just recently claimed that Russia is the biggest enemy ever. Even after we already shifted our focus to Asia and the Pacific, and the Cold War already ended for decades. bunch of dreamers in the party still living their childhood life.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 2:01 pm

from what you stated, it seem like all these countries have some claims, and they're all just as bad as China. These countries have claims on the Paracels and the Spratleys chains of islands. Thus, based on the international sea territorial law, they would have 200 nautical miles of sea territory from the islands counting out. Theres nothing wrong with that, and that 200 nautical miles cant be 70% of the South China sea like what you stated. I dont know where did you get the stats for Phillipines claiming eastern half of the sea and Vietnam claiming 70% of the sea? Also, what is happening is while these islands and its sea territories are being disputed, China is aggressive on inserting its rights as the sovereign. Not only that but their claim to the South China Sea invades other countries' 200 nautical miles sea territories. For example, Vietnam was doing some research in its 200 nautical miles sea territory from Vietnam mainland, and China Navy came and destroyed those research cables, stating that all of South China Sea belong to China. If you follow the news you would have seen that.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 2:50 pm

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/54145000/gi

look at the Chinese claim to South China Sea, the red dotted lines is basically claiming all of South China Sea, that also invades many countries' 200 nautical miles zone based on international law. Im sure the US would have the ability to do such claim somewhere else, but have we ever done so? I dont think so. But we do pick on some guys here and there, but overall, analysts believe the US was a pretty chill hegemon in the past 50 years.

Reply

Kool Guy May 3, 2012 at 2:51 pm

Look at the image on the Phillipines part, China claim basically takes away all of Phillipines sea territory.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 2:51 pm

Jesus, I've posted at least 20+ links on the 9-11 demolitions of WTC 1, 2, and 7. You obviously have watched even one.

Have you ever heard of terms like "industrial furnaces" or "blast furnaces" or "eletric arc furnaces"??? Google them.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 2:51 pm

edit: haven't watched even one.

Reply

Praetorian May 3, 2012 at 2:59 pm

Kool Guy, i’m not trying to politize this. You can give Obama credit for criticizeing the Chinese more then the Bush admin., then yes I agree with you. The Navy was already thinking about the 60 / 40 asset split in 2006
which was under Bush’s watch. Im not saying that Bush had anything to do with that, i’m saying that the military was on China watch at least by 2006, and most likley before that. But you cant give that credit to Obama.

Reply

Praetorian May 3, 2012 at 3:01 pm

I agree Mitt will make some talking blunders, but that stuff happens, look at Joe Biden.

Reply

Peter Wiggins May 3, 2012 at 3:03 pm

So, a plane, flying at about a couple of hundred miles per hour and loaded with a hundred tons of fuel crashed against a skycraper in Glendale and the building, after burning for 24hs did not collapse? I stand corrected, and I must confess that your comment opened my eyes to the vast power of the mass media, that can hide those 500 similar events, even when you were there!
But you should forgive me for my obvious mistake: the only great fire that I witnessed (that of a two stories paint store, ended with the collapse of the building in less than a couple of hours).

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 5:34 pm

lazyass Windbag, please save your idiotic questions till you have watched all the videos debunking the official BS story (I've posted over 20 links in various threads here).

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 8:00 pm

How are the Filipinos gonna afford any kind of major hardware? 15% of the population work outside the country to earn money to send home since the economy has never really been that strong.

Reply

Belesari May 3, 2012 at 8:36 pm

You have one problem. If a nation like China or russia or really any other nation nuked us…….we'd launch hundreds and thousands at them.

So if they attack their nations die. Whats more the Chinese and russians hate eachother. China wants siberia and all it holds. They send settlers to siberia then after awhile see them come floating back down river….in the water dead.

Also if they did attack the entire world economy would collapse…..so they'd be screwed and also NATO would be in it to………so no invasions or ending of the US.

China couldnt win a war with the US but given a decade or two they may come to a parity in sea and air power. We shall see.

Neither side could win a invasion as is.

Reply

Hale May 3, 2012 at 9:18 pm

China sends settlers to Siberia? Why?

I've been to Russo-Chinese border-towns and the contrast is almost funny. To the North of the border you've got these drab Soviet-style block apartments surrounded by small village house, to the South you've got a small vibrant town with traders, foreigners, trucks and tractors running all over the place. Why go North when the Russian come South to buy shirts, TVs, cars and electronics, and sell lumber.

China doesn't have the power to invade. The US does, and uses it frequently. China and it's crisp new military hardware run around bases and do fancy parades, but have absolutely no experience what-so-ever.

Recently a Chinese coast guard vessel confronted the flagship of the Philippine navy who were trying to arrest Chinese fishermen in disputed waters. Instead of sending in warships of their own, the Chinese diplomats convinced the Phillippinos to without draw their warship and send in a coast guard vessel.

Talking of an invasion of Taiwan, I think China has a good chance of defeating the Taiwanese forces before the US gets there, and would probably be able to land. Whether or not that would start a guerrilla war no one can be sure.

Reply

Jeff May 3, 2012 at 10:30 pm

".we'd launch hundreds and thousands at them. "

We don't have hundreds of thousands of nukes, you dumbass!

Reply

cs4 May 5, 2012 at 2:05 am

If launch a hundred and thousand of nukes at the Chinese, you are more likely to die a slow painful death. Imagine millions of tons of radioactive dust for you to breath in / digest in. The Chinese, well they are already turned to glass instantly, while you are slowly turning into a cancerous mush.

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 11:15 pm

Oh, and you are a nut.

Reply

passingby May 3, 2012 at 11:33 pm

Before posting more BS about WTC and 9-11, go repeat junior high a few more times to get your IQ up to room temperature first.

Reply

STemplar May 3, 2012 at 11:38 pm

You first, nut.

Reply

PPP May 4, 2012 at 12:26 am

And look at that little map, see the position of the USNS Impeccable, so now you're agreeing with China that USN is invading China territory, when we're just in the public water?

Reply

Kool Guy May 4, 2012 at 12:50 am

Thats why we have the 7th Fleet rite there that can response in hours and not even in days.

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 1:15 am

Reminder: This is a highly simplified model. In reality, the gathering momentum should have been significantly lower because of the ongoing massive destruction to the upper sections as the collapse progressed downward, resulting in even longer time lapse. Differential equations would have to be used to model that, but given the abundant audio, visual and forensic evidence pointing to the extensive use of explosives, what's the point?

Reply

STemplar May 4, 2012 at 2:32 am

You can save the typing, everyone thinks you are a nut. Mostly because you are a nut.

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 3:05 am

LOL. I'll be truly damned and scared witless if real nuts / school dropouts like you agree with me most of the time.

Reply

STemplar May 4, 2012 at 3:19 am

Whatever you say moonbeam.

Reply

STemplar May 4, 2012 at 4:23 am

You are a really comical guy moonbeam. Do you and the other conspiracy nuts go to amateur night at the comedy clubs in between folding tin foil hats in your mother's basements?

Reply

Vec May 4, 2012 at 9:23 am

Like what u have done.Tell us the results if its hurt.start borrowing

Reply

Kool Guy May 4, 2012 at 2:44 pm

Then you should change your name to dumba$$, cuss i never said the US would win for sure, it was a case scenerio i put out, thats why i kept repeating it. In case we win. get it? dumbo

Reply

STemplar May 4, 2012 at 3:27 pm

You mean after the two largest economies have battered each other into depressions? I still don't think credit ratings will be the issue. Somehow we managed to butcher Japan and Germany and emerged OK. I am more worried about some tool thinking about the 'limited' use of nukes or some other non sense.

In regards to the original question you can't really say without knowing who, if anyone, won. Honestly without really going through its hard to say, there would have to be some sort of accounting in a negotiation. It really just isn't as simple as paying off some treasuries.

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 3:41 pm

LOL. I can change my name to anything but it won't change your Kloolessness. There can be no winning for the US in a war with China. Not a chance. Get it?

Reply

passingby May 4, 2012 at 6:40 pm

suppose the Philippines get all those for free, will a few pieces of hardware actually change anything major?

Reply

tiger May 4, 2012 at 7:16 pm

We getting WAYYYYY off topic here……………

Reply

passingby May 5, 2012 at 12:43 am

Huh? I am not a believer in the conspiracy theory put forward by the 9-11 Commission. You are the conspiracy nut here as you believe the government's story.

I'm a believer in science and logic. I know it's hard for you to comprehend the difference. That's why I've been urging you to repeat junior high a few more times.

Reply

passingby May 5, 2012 at 12:49 am

Why are you asking me? That should be a question for Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, the FBI, the CIA, Mossad, and perhaps their parent – MI6.

I wouldn't mind being an investigator / interrogator if you'd somehow find a way to offer me that position with full authority of employing "enhanced interrogation techniques" endorsed by Dick Cheney himself. I'd also need some extra space at Guantanamo to house my suspects.

Reply

passingby May 5, 2012 at 10:04 am

I'm sure that if you would repeat junior high a few more times, you would be able to answer your own Klooless questions. If you would repeat high school a few more times, you might become smart enough to stop asking Klooless questions.

For now, you would be doing yourself and the readers a BIG favor by stop churning out those utterly Klooless posts filled with false claims, false information, false accusations, and false pretensions.

Reply

Praetorian May 6, 2012 at 12:58 am

LOL, after passingby's act folks, we have Sacha Baron Cohen as Admiral General Aladeen

Reply

STemplar May 6, 2012 at 1:08 pm

I'm urging you to seek serious psychiatric care because you are crazy.

Reply

passingby May 6, 2012 at 1:18 am

Then why are you asking me about when the WTC buildings 1,2 and 7 were wired for demolitions on 9-11?

Reply

STemplar May 6, 2012 at 1:09 pm

If ti will get you to get back on your scizo meds done deal nutter.

Reply

STemplar May 6, 2012 at 1:13 pm

You could do everyone a favor by checking yourself into motel happy you raving lunatic.

Reply

passingby May 8, 2012 at 7:57 am

LOL!! First you believe that fire from jet fuel at level 80+ can melt the entire steel frame and all the concrete structures of WTC tower 1 & 2, causing them collapse at free fall speed; then you pretend to be a demolition expert, and now you are pretending to be a psychiatrist.

And you are calling me crazy, huh? LOL!!!!!!!!!!

Reply

passingby May 9, 2012 at 12:59 am

LOL. Stop projecting your med prescriptions everywhere. Looks like you should first repeat junior high twice before going on a hunger strike. And make that a 30 year strike … you must have been eating the wrong stuff all these years. LOL

Reply

Minnocent Bystander May 15, 2012 at 8:16 am

HAHA LOL!
Good ole' Brother America.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: