PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
texx1 said:
Again with the allusion to the supposed Chinese nefarious design on Siberia, I don't know how many time someone has to point this out, China doesn't want a large stretch of a frozen wasteland. Any resources in Siberia can be purchased through a mutually agreeable price. With Kiev in the bag, US led NATO also has a shared border with Russia.
Click to expand...

You could say China has no designs on Siberia or any other part of Russia today, but you can't know what Chinese intentions will be 10, 20, 30, and 40 years from now. The lack of knowledge of future intentions drives nations to hedge against other nations, especially next door neighbors with history of conflicts. That's why Sino-Russo relationship is inherently unstable.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Blackstone said:
You could say China has no designs on Siberia or any other part of Russia today, but you can't know what Chinese intentions will be 10, 20, 30, and 40 years from now. The lack of knowledge of future intentions drives nations to hedge against other nations, especially next door neighbors with history of conflicts. That's why Sino-Russo relationship is inherently unstable.
Click to expand...

You could say that about the relations between any two countries in the world.

Fact is, unless something fundamental changes, there is no reason for China to desire Siberia or any part of Russia in the long term.

And you're also forgetting Russia has nukes, why would China want to risk destruction for a frozen wasteland that they could access in more peaceful and mutually beneficial ways?
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Arithmetic is difficult for Newsweek:

PLAN has commissioned 80 surface ships since 2000, compared with about 48 vessels commissioned in the 1990s.
Click to expand...
That's about five a year in the '90's and five a year from 2000. Only those with an eye to quality see the development. :)
 
broadsword

broadsword

Brigadier
Both Russia and China need each other as friends well into the distant future. Too much is at stake in terms of trade and peace. Can you imagine two big elephants not peace with each other? Both are also tied to each other ideologically very strongly now unlike in the 60s. There is too much interdependence economically and politically to break the momentum.

But the media love to sow doubts as part of their propaganda agenda.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
China now has 28 active nuclear submarines, as written in the article.

I am very doubtful on the accuracy of this article, not just on the number of nuke subs, but also on everything else he wrote. Newsweek used to be highly regarded by me but this??
 
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
Bltizo said:
You could say that about the relations between any two countries in the world.

Fact is, unless something fundamental changes, there is no reason for China to desire Siberia or any part of Russia in the long term.

And you're also forgetting Russia has nukes, why would China want to risk destruction for a frozen wasteland that they could access in more peaceful and mutually beneficial ways?
Click to expand...

The nuclear angle is the strongest argument against Realist School of International Relations, and there are further arguments to be made on that front, but it's long and probably not worth everyone's patience. So, let's table that debate for now.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
lcloo said:
China now has 28 active nuclear submarines, as written in the article.

I am very doubtful on the accuracy of this article, not just on the number of nuke subs, but also on everything else he wrote. Newsweek used to be highly regarded by me but this??
Click to expand...
Agreed.

As I said, the article itself is alarmist.

I did like the opening couple of paragraphs though.
 
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Just found at the CDF ...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


:p:p:p We know we've seen similar sketches from that demo module first based on real images.

As such Ohhh come on ... that's something called carrier-strip tease !!!

Could it be real ??? Are these sketches indeed based on real images ??? ... come on, but You can leave Your hat on. :eek:

Deino
 

Attachments

  • CV 001A maybe - 20.7.14 sketch 1.jpg
    CV 001A maybe - 20.7.14 sketch 1.jpg
    61.4 KB · Views: 147
  • CV 001A maybe - 20.7.14 sketch 3.jpg
    CV 001A maybe - 20.7.14 sketch 3.jpg
    80.7 KB · Views: 138
  • CV 001A maybe - 20.7.14 sketch 4.jpg
    CV 001A maybe - 20.7.14 sketch 4.jpg
    129.9 KB · Views: 171
Last edited:
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
Deino said:
Just found at the CDF ... :p:p:p We know we've seen similar sketches from that demo module first based on real images.

As such Ohhh come on ... that's something called carrier-strip tease !!!

Could it be real ??? Are these sketches indeed based on real images ??? ... come on, but You can leave Your hat on. :eek:

Deino
Click to expand...

No visible ski ramp...
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
As I said over on CDF, that could just be artistic license and/or laziness.
Edit: or maybe the angle of the drawing/picture itself. Similar photo angles of real carriers give rise to similar illusions.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top