075 LHD thread

[asif iqbal]

2012-11-15 – On November 13, CCTV Commentator, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo, says China is developing a large amphibious assault ship which is similar to the Landing Helicopter Assault ship in United States Navy on CCTV-4 “Today’s Focus” Interview program. Yin’s voice is China’s first time publicly expression on amphibious assault ship development and attracts media attentions.


In the CCTV program, when the host asking that PLA new WZ-10 helicopters would be deployed on the aircraft carrier, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo replied: “WZ-10 and WZ-19 may deployed in China’s future amphibious assault ship. And China now is developing a new generation of amphibious ship, 40000 ton displacement, like U.S. Navy Landing Helicopter Assault LHD ship. The heavy transportation helicopters on this amphibious assault ship will be escorted by armed choppers like WZ-10 and WZ-19.”

There were indications that the Chinese Navy amphibious assault ship has displacement of 48,000 tons. When PLA Navy has these warships, China will be able to deploy armed forces in any country of the Western Pacific area. Analysts pointed out that, once the Sino-Japanese military conflict breaks, Chinese warships will use this type of amphibious assault ship on Okinawa and the Japan four largest islands landing operations.

An amphibious assault ship (also referred to as a commando carrier or an amphibious assault carrier) is a type of amphibious warfare ship employed to land and support ground forces on enemy territory by an amphibious assault. The design evolved from the helicopter carrier, but includes support for amphibious landing craft, with most designs including a well deck.

The America class amphibious assault ship is the newest amphibious assault ship of U.S. Navy. The America class LHA has displacement of 45,000 long tons and uses helicopters and MV-22B Osprey V/STOLs, supported by AV-8B Harrier or F-35 Lightning II V/STOL fighter planes and various attack helicopters.

Personally I believe the China has already not only designed but has on long lead orders on its future LHD, Carriers and even Cruisers

It's just a matter of time, for China and it's surrounding areas I would think it makes perfect sense to have a amphibious assault ship in the class of 40,000 tons, I mean anything less and it won't cut it

Such a vessal will be able to lift more than 30 helos including some heavy weights

Would be good to see each fleet with

A landing Flotilla of 3 x LPD, 2 x LHD and a carrier in each fleet

That would mean a total of 9 LPD, 6 LHD and 3 carriers NOT including the Liaoning which should be reserved as a training carrier, maybe give the SSF a super carrier nuclear powered

 

[Lion]

They couldn't find any nuclear weapons, or any portions that had been constructed or were being constructed. They thought he was further along. I have no doubts however that he had a program, and that whatever portions of it were sensitive were moved out well before the invasion.

As to WMDs. Saddam did have some. In terms of Chemical Weapons and even a rudimentary biological program. A lot of evidence was found of the chemical weapons...we know he used them against his own people and in the Iran war. And the Coalition found those.

So it is not correct to say he had no WMDs, it is correct to say that they could find no evidence of any nuclear weapons, or any program at any advanced stage of production.

IMHO, Bush made a bigger mistake then justifying the invasion on WMDs of any type. Saddam had flaunted and thumbed his nose at the agreements he signed to end the 1st Guld War and had been doing so almost 10 years. His activities in that regard were more than enough cause to go in and finish the job that was halted back then as regards Saddam and his regime.

The 2nd mistake, and it was even more costly in US life, was to then allow a vacuum to develop which bred the level of insurgency that ultimately had to be defeated. You do not take out such a totalitarian ruler and not replace the police and internal security with something that can keep the order while the constitution is developed and then elections held. The Bush administration started off, after handily defeating Saddam and his army, doing just that.

No Jeff. Those were just excuse used by US to justify an invasion of Iraq. Bush was even convinced he was fighting a war which can be funded by itself from Iraq captured oil field. War will end quickly and Iraqi will welcome Americans. Once that is settle. He will take on Iran. I will say its a brilliant plan if everything goes according he predicted. Unfortunately, the insurgency took its toil and even bleed more money and casualties from US than expected.

 

[A.Man]

They couldn't find any nuclear weapons, or any portions that had been constructed or were being constructed. They thought he was further along. I have no doubts however that he had a program, and that whatever portions of it were sensitive were moved out well before the invasion.

As to WMDs. Saddam did have some. In terms of Chemical Weapons and even a rudimentary biological program. A lot of evidence was found of the chemical weapons...we know he used them against his own people and in the Iran war. And the Coalition found those.

So it is not correct to say he had no WMDs, it is correct to say that they could find no evidence of any nuclear weapons, or any program at any advanced stage of production.

IMHO, Bush made a bigger mistake then justifying the invasion on WMDs of any type. Saddam had flaunted and thumbed his nose at the agreements he signed to end the 1st Guld War and had been doing so almost 10 years. His activities in that regard were more than enough cause to go in and finish the job that was halted back then as regards Saddam and his regime.

The 2nd mistake, and it was even more costly in US life, was to then allow a vacuum to develop which bred the level of insurgency that ultimately had to be defeated. You do not take out such a totalitarian ruler and not replace the police and internal security with something that can keep the order while the constitution is developed and then elections held. The Bush administration started off, after handily defeating Saddam and his army, doing just that.

My friend, please just let me off the topic for my reasoning.

Chiang Kai-shek lost the civil war to Mao's communist in China. Chiang Kai-shek assumed that he would win if he could kill all the communists. The order was: "Rather kill 1000 wrong, don't allow a single communist to get away." In 1935, before the Long March, Red Army had 300,000 men & women. One year late, only 10,000 made to Yanan.

Assumed Saddam had WMD, so we went in, the price-900,000 Iraqi lives. Was the price too high for the Iraqis?

There is an old American say: "Assumption is the mother of all the f--k ups."

My assumption: if we looked China as an enemy, then China will be our enemy!

Since the Korea War, Americans have been asking "Who lost China?"

 

[Jeff Head]

No Jeff. Those were just excuse used by US to justify an invasion of Iraq.

Yes, Patawan. The WMD were an excuse and pretext as I have stated, but it was one based on numerous intelligence reports form numerous countries...but it was also an un-needed excuse because Hussein had provided ample pretext himself by not abiding by the agreements he made to stop the 1st gulf war.

Bush was even convinced he was fighting a war which can be funded by itself from Iraq captured oil field.

Source" Or link to any documentation where Bush ever said or implied this? Not a link to some conspiracy thread, but an actual news report quoting Bush as saying or implying this. Hint: There isn't one.

War will end quickly and Iraqi will welcome Americans.

Iraqis did welcome Americans after Hussein was defeated, there are thousands of pictures of it happening. The mistake was not putting strong security in place to keep the peace after the military victory while the nation developed its constitution and voted. Not doping so, allowed for the birth of the insurgency by allowing them top operate, organize, and then begin attacking relatively unopposed to begin with. That was the mistake.

The Iraqis, in spite of this, stuck with their own movement to create a new government and then vote first for their constitution and then their own leaders. They did so in the face of death threats and attacks by Al Quida. Remember the millions of purple fingers?

So, in the end, Iraq has its own government and they are now making their own way. But they are still a country torn...and that goes way back before any Bush to the end of World War I when political lines were drawn for political purposes that made no sense ethnically or culturally.

 

[delft]

It was a colossal brain fart by U.S. and all other Western Intelligence Agencies. Mistake happens, and that was a big one.

OT OT
But this still asks for a response. The Dutch government was advised by its military intelligence service that there was no evidence of WMD's in Iraq but it decided no doubt for political reasons to believe Tony Blair that such a weapon could be launched against Western Europe in three quarters of an hour. It therefore supported the US/UK assault on Iraq "politically" against the majority of the members of parliament. My Dutch newspaper ( NRC ) has written about this repeatedly.

 

[delft]

They couldn't find any nuclear weapons, or any portions that had been constructed or were being constructed. They thought he was further along. I have no doubts however that he had a program, and that whatever portions of it were sensitive were moved out well before the invasion.

As to WMDs. Saddam did have some. In terms of Chemical Weapons and even a rudimentary biological program. A lot of evidence was found of the chemical weapons...we know he used them against his own people and in the Iran war. And the Coalition found those.

So it is not correct to say he had no WMDs, it is correct to say that they could find no evidence of any nuclear weapons, or any program at any advanced stage of production.

IMHO, Bush made a bigger mistake then justifying the invasion on WMDs of any type. Saddam had flaunted and thumbed his nose at the agreements he signed to end the 1st Guld War and had been doing so almost 10 years. His activities in that regard were more than enough cause to go in and finish the job that was halted back then as regards Saddam and his regime.

The 2nd mistake, and it was even more costly in US life, was to then allow a vacuum to develop which bred the level of insurgency that ultimately had to be defeated. You do not take out such a totalitarian ruler and not replace the police and internal security with something that can keep the order while the constitution is developed and then elections held. The Bush administration started off, after handily defeating Saddam and his army, doing just that.

There had been speculation in US think tanks that an Iraq divided in several countries, a Kurdish one, a Sunni one and one or more Shiite ones, similar apparently to what is now tried in Syria, would be more easily controlled and thus increase the power of US over the oil supply of Europe and East Asia. So probably that 2nd point was not a mistake but intentional.

 

[franco-russe]

If so, it was a bad miscalculation. US control of Iraq is not very evident.

 

[Preux]

I am sensing a great disturbance in the Force, as if a handful of old and respected users screaming in horror, and then silenced suddenly by a fat pilot...

 

[Blackstone]

China Military Review says the construction on Changxing Island is a Type 75 LHA.

 

[bd popeye]

I am sensing a great disturbance in the Force, as if a handful of old and respected users screaming in horror, and then silenced suddenly by a fat pilot...

Exactly..

Gentlemen..

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

bd popeye super moderator