China's strategic vulnerabilities

steel21

steel21

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yodello said:
Well said..! I really hope more Asian talent start flowing back to Asia overtime, what with the blatant racism being meted out in the U.S and some parts of Europe and Australia.
Many US Citizens are so brainwashed by their own Media, they do not even realise how indoctrinated they are. The US is already ideologically set, and China is already an undeclared enemy whether it is mentioned or not.
" An ideological enemy is the most dangerous kind of enemy" because nothing you do or say, even with the best of intentions can sway their mind, since their ideology dictates that any human that does not conform to their ideology is a mortal enemy. Period.

Dr.Michio Kaku once stated that the secret 'superpower' of the united States is the H1B Visa. Many US citizens seem to be forgetting about this. They think it is their God-given right to the best of everything and that it is their right to rule the world. While the US runs amok creating havoc in the world, majority of US Citizens are seeing their living standards go down.
I cannot even believe that with the number of homeless people living in the United States and the amount of Violent crimes being committed daily in many US cities, the US Politicians have the nerve to go about lecturing people on Governance.

I sincerely hope that in the decades to come, more Asians will start returning to their own countries. There will indeed be a painful and rude awakening for a lot of US 'nationalists' down the line.
It will be better for the world at large.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, this will inevitably happen.

US only really thrives from a lead position and or position of abundance. As the world shifts from industrial ages to the information/automation-AI age, those advantages shrink.

As I said before, the melting pot was a nice ideal to strive for. But to melt the groups together, they needed flame/energy, which was provided by prosperity.

Once Us falls from its position of largess, it will have a hard time regaining that position based on ethnic and political division. The shrinking pie will inherently generate more and more animus, driving away new talent.

This was to some extent the result of small government and globalization. As the rest of the world grows, there will be less and less impetus to migrate based on economic needs.
 
J

jimmyjames30x30

Junior Member
Registered Member
One big vulnerability China could face is that if countries like Japan, Australia, etc chooses to develop weapons systems that is opposite in philosophy to the USA. For example, if the US focuses on developing larger nuclear super carriers, then the Japanese and the Aussies and other would develop smaller more mid-size carriers in large number. This would be very bad for China, because this would mean that the Chinese will need to develop a doctrine that can counter and match both philosophies.

Therefore, I am a big advocate for 003 sized aircraft carrier. Because it is larger than the 50,000/60,000 ton carriers like the QE and Kuznetsov class, etc, but smaller than Ford class. This kind of ship would be cheap enough to build and deploy in larger numbers in a very fast pace (compare to a juggernaut like the Ford Class), while it is also good enough to deploy against Ford Class with superior numbers (6 003 could certainly match 4 Ford Class, in important maritime trade route choke points close to China).

China could definitely build a large number of 003 in a fast pace. But if the PLAN decides to pursuit a Ford Class as fast as possible, the resources will be saved from building more 003, and it would take a much longer time for a 004/005 to reach a significant enough number (more than 3). This would mean a much longer significant strategic vulnerability period. What's worse is that, this would give countries like Japan, and Aussie a chance to use their small capital ships on a harassment-warfare. Such harassment warfare would be quite difficult to deal with if they conduct such in coordination with the US supercarrier strike groups.
 
Broccoli

Broccoli

Senior Member
I'd put my money on better nuclear subs armed with cruise missiles, stealth bombers, longer ranger missiles, etc.

Let's take a look what kinda enemies carriers are going against what they didn't need to in early 2000s: Satellites are far more prevelant nowadays and soon we'll have real time imaginary from commercial satellites (hard to shoot down ones), much touted hypersonic weapons with thousand kilometer ranges, ever better hydrophones, loitering underwater drones, unammed small & extra quiet submarine with maybe with four torpedoes, smaller drone carriers what launch massive attacks with AI drones where jamming signals won't do much as they can use their own "brains" to seek & attack enemy without needing a attack command from the carrier they begun their journey, maybe cheap drone torpedoes what roam the ocean battlefield attacking alone or in groups.

One small missile or torpedo can make a 100 ton carrier useless... don't need to sink it as long it's a mission kill. Imagine sailing your brand new carrier strike group into waters where you know there could hundreds of drone torpedoes lurking around ready to attack.
 
Last edited:
S

sndef888

Captain
Registered Member
Broccoli said:
I'd put my money on better nuclear subs armed with cruise missiles, stealth bombers, longer ranger missiles, etc.

Let's take a look what kinda enemies carriers are going against what they didn't need to in early 2000s: Satellites are far more prevelant nowadays and soon we'll have real time imaginary from commercial satellites (hard to shoot down ones), much touted hypersonic weapons with thousand kilometer ranges, ever better hydrophones, loitering underwater drones, unammed small & extra quiet submarine with maybe armed with four torpedoes, smaller drones carriers wnat launch massive attacks with AI drones where jamming signals won't do much as they can use their own "brains" to seek & attack enemy without needing a attack command from the carrier they begun their journey, maybe even cheap drone torpedoes what roam the ocean battlefield attacking alone or in groups.
Click to expand...
Agree. I think carriers will find it very hard to survive in a high tempo war especially since China's seas are so small. Any recon plane can easily find one
 
N

Nobaron

Junior Member
Registered Member
Broccoli said:
I'd put my money on better nuclear subs armed with cruise missiles, stealth bombers, longer ranger missiles, etc.

Let's take a look what kinda enemies carriers are going against what they didn't need to in early 2000s: Satellites are far more prevelant nowadays and soon we'll have real time imaginary from commercial satellites (hard to shoot down ones), much touted hypersonic weapons with thousand kilometer ranges, ever better hydrophones, loitering underwater drones, unammed small & extra quiet submarine with maybe armed with four torpedoes, smaller drones carriers wnat launch massive attacks with AI drones where jamming signals won't do much as they can use their own "brains" to seek & attack enemy without needing a attack command from the carrier they flew away,
Click to expand...
I was thinking exactly same. I want to throw in Russian like intercontinental range HGVs, if possible with tactical nukes or high explosive warheads that can target & destroy economic center like NYC.
This will give complete control over escalation ladder
 
S

sndef888

Captain
Registered Member
Despite China having worse relations with Japan, South Korea seems to be actually the bigger long term worry

For one it has a direct land border with China (once reunified that is)

And secondly, it's population is so completely westernised and christianised that they're basically americans hiding under asian skin. Even Japan retains much more domestic culture


It would be a disaster if China ever let Korea reunify under the south's rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top