If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
From: Alan Minyard
f course we would not be stupid enough to fight the PRC in a "ground war". We would utterly destroy their command and control, their air force etc. Interesting article on the Chinese air forces in issue 119 of Policy Review. Excerpt: "China now has the second largest defense budget in the world, with expenditures to boost its intercontinental ballistic missile arsenal and acquire nuclear submarines and destroyers. Yet the Chinese air force remains very weak, with capabilities dramatically inferior to the U.S.’s. The arsenals of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (plaaf) and Naval Air Force (planaf) consist mostly of fighter planes (used primarily for defensive purposes) imported from Russia. The scarcity of bombers (used for offensive purposes) and China’s continued reliance on foreign planes pose a puzzle to U.S. defense planners. Apparently content to rely on missiles to project power, China’s doctrine contrasts sharply with American ideas about the importance of air superiority. "Following the successful air campaigns of the 1991 Gulf War, Chinese defense analysts tuned in to the American debate over the possibility of relying on air power alone and the connection between the use of air power and avoiding friendly military and foreign civilian casualties. In recent publications, generals from China’s military academies have treated air power-related themes — including what America’s strategic air advantage consists in and how it might be mitigated or neutralized — at length. Chinese observers also noted how the wars in Kosovo and Afghanistan confirmed American faith in the increasing efficacy of air power in light of dramatic technological advances." Complete article at: http://www.policyreview.org/jun03/newmyer.html Chris Mark |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
The scarcity of bombers (used for offensive purposes) and China’s continued reliance on foreign planes pose a puzzle to U.S. defense planners. Well, I suppose it's possible that here is a nation with no offensive intentions! (And apart from Taiwan, I suppose that's true.) Let's face it: China has been very good at getting what it wants, short of war. The only significant combat it's fought outside its borders, the Korean War, began a result of a significant threat to its borders. all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put CUB in subject line) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah I guess facts are rather silly... but I aint the inventor of
those facts... That's obvious, you just make up your "facts". Have you ever worked together with U.S. troops? They must always have bodyguards from other countries when going from place A to place B. Hogwash. The only time I've been protected by other than US forces was at Fairford where British MoD forces guarded the perimeter and US forces the interior. This arrangement was required because US forces have no arrest authority outside of the fence. The same arrangement is in place throughout the world, its a legal matter genius. Do you know that the U.S. sends U.N. observers to some places? That would be interesting since the US, nor any single country, has the authority to "send" UN forces anywhere. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, that one would have come in handy on several occasions. Of course our
desire to complete the mission would have ended up with us being court martialed for violating it :-) Yeah, but if you going to violate a military regulation, I always found it useful to know exactly which one you were "bending" BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
|
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Mentioning grooming standards reminded me of that superior officer who
made the Special Forces guys shave their beards and cut their hair in Afghanistan, immediately blowing their cover. Another example of a careerist 'garritrooper'. Bet he never ever left the compound except to go home to the ZI. Walt BJ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
04 Oct 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 4th 03 07:51 PM |
B Nice war - here's the bill | Alan Minyard | Military Aviation | 32 | September 20th 03 06:36 AM |
18 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 03:47 AM |
04 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 5th 03 02:57 AM |
07 Aug 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | August 8th 03 02:51 AM |