Ballistic Missiles, are they a solution to China lack of aerial tankers?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Phead128

Captain
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Gordon Chang is the biggest idiot out there. His was raised by a Chinese dad that was virulently anti-CCP, so that is where he derives his incredible bias against China from. His mom is white. He said while growing up half-Asian, the white kids in the neighborhood would tease him and make fun of his background. So there is the origin of a self-hating Asian right there. White wannabe.

Also there is massive increase in anti-China sentiment in the Western media these days, a noticeable uptick that is different from the fad of 'currency manipulation', 'smog', 'free Tibet', etc... especially after the U.S. government shutdown.

I view it as an increased U.S. insecurity that Western media is so incredibly bias against the rise of China. Yet, it's undisputable that China is rising, it's even an DLC for the new BF4 (China Rising), which ironically features U.S. invading mainland China and sieging Shanghai because China has collapsed in a revolution! lmfao, Westerner's wet dream for China.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
so far outside the topic that it's not even on the planet

guys lets just stop.
We have left the rather flimsy basis for this topic and turned to personality, nationality and media blasting. lets put the nail in the coffin and close this sucker. good reddens to bad rubish
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Gordon Chang is the biggest idiot out there. His was raised by a Chinese dad that was virulently anti-CCP, so that is where he derives his incredible bias against China from. His mom is white. He said while growing up half-Asian, the white kids in the neighborhood would tease him and make fun of his background. So there is the origin of a self-hating Asian right there. White wannabe.

Also there is massive increase in anti-China sentiment in the Western media these days, a noticeable uptick that is different from the fad of 'currency manipulation', 'smog', 'free Tibet', etc... especially after the U.S. government shutdown.

I view it as an increased U.S. insecurity that Western media is so incredibly bias against the rise of China. Yet, it's undisputable that China is rising, it's even an DLC for the new BF4 (China Rising), which ironically features U.S. invading mainland China and sieging Shanghai because China has collapsed in a revolution! lmfao, Westerner's wet dream for China.

Gordon Chang isn't an idiot, but a zealous crusader against the CCP. He is also for Taiwan and Tibet independence, and will do and say anything to assist them. He has been loudly and continuously predicting China's social, political, and economic collapse since 2001, and when he's proven wrong, he simply pushes the date out another year. Regime change in China has become all consuming to him and people like him, to the point where they would risk war to achieve it. Sad, but true.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Ok lets get back on topic gentlemen, here's an interesting read.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In 2010 the Chinese military was reported to have started tests on its most ambitious missile project, the DF-21A, an anti-ship ballistic missile.

China's decision to use ballistic missiles for anti-ship warfare is unusual considering that targeting moving ships with a missile on a ballistic trajectory is much harder and requires more sophisticated navigation than cruise missiles. The People's Liberation Army decision to opt for an anti-ship ballistic missile reflects the growing confidence and sophistication of its military industries.

Analysts are divided over the implications of the new system for the US military. Some claim it is a game changer and a threat to US forces in the region. Other analysts observed that the US military has several ways of defeating the anti-ship ballistic missile, such as using decoys and by targeting Chinese support and communication systems. While both sides of the debate have raised valid points, one should not see the Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile in isolation, but as part of larger process of military modernisation and a changing doctrine in the PLA.

Chinese military strategists have for millenniums been fascinated by asymmetric methods of warfare. China has no illusions about its military inferiority vis-à-vis the US and knows that the status is likely to endure for at least two decades.

As such, the PLA has been developing a full range of asymmetric strategies to deter the US until its military reaches maturity.

Aware of the US dependence on space and satellite communications to conduct even the most basic military operations, the PLA has for the past decade invested significant amounts to develop anti-satellite weapons. In January 2007, China fired its first anti-satellite missile, destroying one of its own ageing satellites.

The PLA's asymmetric warfare strategy is not limited to the domain of outer space, but extends to land, sea, air and cyberspace. For instance, at sea, the PLA Navy is not focusing on matching the US carrier for carrier or ship for ship as some might expect. China has been deploying a growing number of attack submarines, both conventionally powered and nuclear powered, with submarines accounting for 45 per cent of its naval combatants.

In addition to submarines, the Chinese navy is deploying thousands of land-based missiles, both ballistic and cruise types. The navy is also developing dozens of stealth fast-attack missile craft and corvettes such as the Hubei class catamaran. In narrow seas and close coastal environments, these vessels can be quite effective against larger craft.

In contrast, the US military has regarded asymmetric and other forms of unconventional warfare with marginal interest. The so-called US style of warfare focuses on offensive firepower and tends to neglect the defensive elements.

The question is not whether the US is capable of countering a particular system or not, but whether it's capable of appreciating the nature of an asymmetric strategy across all domains of the battle space.

While the US will maintain military superiority for the foreseeable future, China's asymmetric capabilities have the potential to mitigate this advantage. This could have a positive effect in the sense that both great powers deter each other. China and the US have grown increasingly economically interdependent, sharing many common interests. This lucrative relationship may reduce the chance for tension. However, one should remember, in both world wars of the previous century, Germany was Britain's largest trade partner.
 

bajingan

Senior Member
That article is garbage, but remember the PLAAF is facing a situation that, if to catch up, it'd need a total overhaul that, in short, throw away tons of existing hardware that's at least one generation behind the curve, mostly two; and have to deal with re-shaping its men to new doctrines of air and combined warfare; plus to overhaul the national defense strategy that's largely reactionary in nature, yet any move towards more "proactive" direction will be branded as aggression by its neighbours, make the regional arms race goes from hot to red-hot.

But mostly, it's about money - PLAAF ain't the only branch of the PLA that urgently need - and going through - hardware overhauls. Since all branches are making their accelerated effort of catching-ups, there'll be budgetary constraints, so without a budget like the US have, suitable hardware and platforms will take time to be introduced.

So for the time being their offensive punch will still need to rely on ballistic missiles, which are still technically more difficult to intercept; the newer addition of the cruise missiles allows for a more precise strike option without risking the air crew to harm, as do the likes of US or other major superpowers fielding their own cruise missiles in their strike options.

I agree with you, in my opinion the branch that will be given the money the most would be the second artillery corps, president Xi personally visited SAC headquarter himself
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODERATOR'S COMMENTS <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

THREAD CLOSED

Entire subject of thread based on a flawed premise in an article by a very biased analyst, and leading to bashing, flame baiting, and emotional arguments regarding that analyst and other like him. No need for that on SD.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> END MODERATOR'S COMMENTS <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top