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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How exactly will Taiwan torpedo the dam?
What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now
or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html -HJC |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
reads to me like a leftist commie-lover writing.
Even if the Republic of China has a bomb large enough to seriously damage the 3 gorges dam they lack the means to deliver that bomb to the target. This in contrast with communist China who have ICBMs, SLBMs and intercontinental bombers carrying multi-megaton nuclear weapons. "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html -HJC |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:18:58 +0200, "Jeroen Wenting"
wrote: reads to me like a leftist commie-lover writing. Even if the Republic of China has a bomb large enough to seriously damage the 3 gorges dam they lack the means to deliver that bomb to the target. This in contrast with communist China who have ICBMs, SLBMs and intercontinental bombers carrying multi-megaton nuclear weapons. "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html -HJC Actually they don't have "intercontinental" bombers. Not unless you mean flying from Eastern Europe to Western Asia. A B-52 is an intercontinental bomber, a Tu-16 is not. The Tu-16 is more in the class of the B-47. Not that it matters when they're only flying to Taiwan. Trying to get them there would be a bad idea though and China doesn't have so many ICBMs that they'd waste one on Taiwan. Not to mention if they ever went nuclear they'd have DEFINITELY made life interesting for themselves. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Henry J Cobb
wrote: What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html Some divers placing a couple of tons of explosive against the base underwater should do the trick. The issue isn't Taiwan, though, it's someone inside of mainland China deciding to cause a revolution (this would be one way to go about it). -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html Crap. Went to the link and found...more rambling rants from Henry himself! Finally waded through the putrifying mass of illogical "analaysis" provided by himself and found the DoD report *itself*--only to find no mention of being able to breach Three Gorges, just a reference to a some Taiwanese having expressed the *opinion* that they think Taiwan needs to develop a capability to threaten high-value targets on the mainland, with Three Gorges as an example. Let's see--taking down associated generators, substations, HV transmission lines, and/or damaging gates, etc., all constitute "threats" to Three Gorges, so this is apparently just another HJC "leaping to (wrong) conclusions and supporting them with cites taken-out-of-context" exercise... Brooks -HJC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html Crap. Went to the link and found...more rambling rants from Henry himself! Finally waded through the putrifying mass of illogical "analaysis" provided by himself and found the DoD report *itself*--only to find no mention of being able to breach Three Gorges, just a reference to a some Taiwanese having expressed the *opinion* that they think Taiwan needs to develop a capability to threaten high-value targets on the mainland, with Three Gorges as an example. Let's see--taking down associated generators, substations, HV transmission lines, and/or damaging gates, etc., all constitute "threats" to Three Gorges, so this is apparently just another HJC "leaping to (wrong) conclusions and supporting them with cites taken-out-of-context" exercise... Brooks -HJC Don't you guys read the newspapers? This story, about Taiwan holding high value targets on the mainland at risk to include breaching of said dam as primary, not just the associated infrasturcture, has been an AP piece in the LA Times all week. I think there were at least a couple of stories about it including the Sino response about "...blocking out the sky..." with their retaliation. The first question is meant to be rhetorical. Don't ride the "no I don't read the crap liberal media" horse. JB |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Baker" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html Crap. Went to the link and found...more rambling rants from Henry himself! Finally waded through the putrifying mass of illogical "analaysis" provided by himself and found the DoD report *itself*--only to find no mention of being able to breach Three Gorges, just a reference to a some Taiwanese having expressed the *opinion* that they think Taiwan needs to develop a capability to threaten high-value targets on the mainland, with Three Gorges as an example. Let's see--taking down associated generators, substations, HV transmission lines, and/or damaging gates, etc., all constitute "threats" to Three Gorges, so this is apparently just another HJC "leaping to (wrong) conclusions and supporting them with cites taken-out-of-context" exercise... Brooks -HJC Don't you guys read the newspapers? This story, about Taiwan holding high value targets on the mainland at risk to include breaching of said dam as primary, not just the associated infrasturcture, has been an AP piece in the LA Times all week. I think there were at least a couple of stories about it including the Sino response about "...blocking out the sky..." with their retaliation. The first question is meant to be rhetorical. Don't ride the "no I don't read the crap liberal media" horse. No, my impression of the general media when it comes to things military is not too complimentary. If your numerous references in the LA Times to this come from the DoD report mentioned by Mr. Cobb, then it has been taken out of context (just as Mr. Cobb has--and has repeatedly done in the past)--read the actual verbage in the report. It does not credit Taiwan with this capability, nor does it specify that in order to target said dam, one would have to actually breach it--it only mentions that some Taiwanese have ruminated over the possibility of their being able to hit HVT's, with Three Gorges mentioned as an example, as being a good course of action for the future. In other words, it is a non-story. Brooks JB |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Jim Baker" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html Crap. Went to the link and found...more rambling rants from Henry himself! Finally waded through the putrifying mass of illogical "analaysis" provided by himself and found the DoD report *itself*--only to find no mention of being able to breach Three Gorges, just a reference to a some Taiwanese having expressed the *opinion* that they think Taiwan needs to develop a capability to threaten high-value targets on the mainland, with Three Gorges as an example. Let's see--taking down associated generators, substations, HV transmission lines, and/or damaging gates, etc., all constitute "threats" to Three Gorges, so this is apparently just another HJC "leaping to (wrong) conclusions and supporting them with cites taken-out-of-context" exercise... Brooks -HJC Don't you guys read the newspapers? This story, about Taiwan holding high value targets on the mainland at risk to include breaching of said dam as primary, not just the associated infrasturcture, has been an AP piece in the LA Times all week. I think there were at least a couple of stories about it including the Sino response about "...blocking out the sky..." with their retaliation. The first question is meant to be rhetorical. Don't ride the "no I don't read the crap liberal media" horse. No, my impression of the general media when it comes to things military is not too complimentary. If your numerous references in the LA Times to this come from the DoD report mentioned by Mr. Cobb, then it has been taken out of context (just as Mr. Cobb has--and has repeatedly done in the past)--read the actual verbage in the report. It does not credit Taiwan with this capability, nor does it specify that in order to target said dam, one would have to actually breach it--it only mentions that some Taiwanese have ruminated over the possibility of their being able to hit HVT's, with Three Gorges mentioned as an example, as being a good course of action for the future. In other words, it is a non-story. Brooks Well, I'd have to say you missed the whole point of the "story" Brooks. It's a political story about politics taken to extremes and what that would mean to the U.S. politically or, more problematically, militarily, vis-a-vis GWB stated intention to defend Taiwan. WRT the rest of your response, it's irrelevant to me that you have a problem with Mr. Cobb whom I don't recall seeing here before, maybe just me not noticing or you noticing too much. I read the report and your interpretation of it not mentioning Taiwanese military capability is, IMHO, also irrelevant to the story. It's a political piece by the DoD discusing the East Asian balance of power and that regions huge influence on the world militarily and politically over the coming decades. In other words, it's the antithesis of a non-story. R/JB |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Baker" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Jim Baker" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... What was the weapon that the Pentagon authors think that Taiwan either has now or could develop that would breach the Three Gorges Dam? http://militarynewswatch.blogspot.co...rpedo-dam.html Crap. Went to the link and found...more rambling rants from Henry himself! Finally waded through the putrifying mass of illogical "analaysis" provided by himself and found the DoD report *itself*--only to find no mention of being able to breach Three Gorges, just a reference to a some Taiwanese having expressed the *opinion* that they think Taiwan needs to develop a capability to threaten high-value targets on the mainland, with Three Gorges as an example. Let's see--taking down associated generators, substations, HV transmission lines, and/or damaging gates, etc., all constitute "threats" to Three Gorges, so this is apparently just another HJC "leaping to (wrong) conclusions and supporting them with cites taken-out-of-context" exercise... Brooks -HJC Don't you guys read the newspapers? This story, about Taiwan holding high value targets on the mainland at risk to include breaching of said dam as primary, not just the associated infrasturcture, has been an AP piece in the LA Times all week. I think there were at least a couple of stories about it including the Sino response about "...blocking out the sky..." with their retaliation. The first question is meant to be rhetorical. Don't ride the "no I don't read the crap liberal media" horse. No, my impression of the general media when it comes to things military is not too complimentary. If your numerous references in the LA Times to this come from the DoD report mentioned by Mr. Cobb, then it has been taken out of context (just as Mr. Cobb has--and has repeatedly done in the past)--read the actual verbage in the report. It does not credit Taiwan with this capability, nor does it specify that in order to target said dam, one would have to actually breach it--it only mentions that some Taiwanese have ruminated over the possibility of their being able to hit HVT's, with Three Gorges mentioned as an example, as being a good course of action for the future. In other words, it is a non-story. Brooks Well, I'd have to say you missed the whole point of the "story" Brooks. It's a political story about politics taken to extremes Then why are you bantering about it in this forum? Now, did the articles in question use the DoD report as their basis for the Three Gorges scenario or not? If not, then we are discussing completely different topics; if they did, and as you have indicated the claim was for a breach of the dam, then they have distorted what the actual DoD report said. and what that would mean to the U.S. politically or, more problematically, militarily, vis-a-vis GWB stated intention to defend Taiwan. WRT the rest of your response, it's irrelevant to me that you have a problem with Mr. Cobb whom I don't recall seeing here before, maybe just me not noticing or you noticing too much. LOL! The guy is somewhat infamous in both this NG and in one of the naval groups (among others I suspect) for his ability to twist very strange interpretations from various sources, apply what can only be described as extremely skewed analysis to various and widespread military subjects, and then repeatedly ignore honest-to-goodness facts as they are presented to him (often from the same source he has just distorted). Either you have not been about these parts for long, or your newsgroup provider has a serious problem with message retention, because otherwise you'd have to know who he is. And BTW, I believe a Google would show that quite a few other posters have tried to disabuse Henry of some of his more outlandish claims, some rather recently; his continual insistence that he is better at making military decisions than the folks who actually wear the uniform are is a frequent sore point. I read the report and your interpretation of it not mentioning Taiwanese military capability is, IMHO, also irrelevant to the story. My interpretation? How do you get anything other than the noting that some Taiwanese have stated they think Taiwan should have a capability to strike mainland HVT's, with Three Gorges offered as an example, from that? "Taipei political and military leaders have recently suggested acquiring weapon systems capable of standoff strikes against the Chinese mainland as a cost-effective means of deterrence. Taiwan's Air Force already has a latent capability for airstrikes against China. Leaders have publicly cited the need for ballistic and land-attack cruise missiles. Since Taipei cannot match Beijing's ability to field offensive systems, proponents of strikes against the mainland apparently hope that merely presenting credible threats to China's urban population or high- value targets, such as the Three Gorges Dam, will deter Chinese military coercion." (from pp. 52-53 of the DoD report) If *your* interpretation of that is that it requires a weapon capable of breaching a massive dam like Three Gorges, then you need a reality check and some remedial reading comprehension work. That dam is over 180 meters tall, and contains some 26 plus *million* cubic meters of concrete (more than *twice* the mass of the world's previous record holder). It is designed to handle a 7.0 Richter scale event. Reality check time--what conventional weapon do you know of, or can you even conceive of, that could *breach* a structure of those massive dimensions? Answer--none. The largest bomb the ROCAF could deliver would be maybe a 2000 pounder, of which maybe half is explosive filler. Submerge that puppy on the upstream side (a la the old Barnes Walls "Dambusters" approach) and you'll be lucky to spall some concrete and kill oodles of fish. Which takes us back to hitting and destroying/disrupting ancilliary aspects of the dam infrastructure. If your vaunted LA Times piece is saying otherwise, shame on them. It's a political piece by the DoD discusing the East Asian balance of power and that regions huge influence on the world militarily and politically over the coming decades. In other words, it's the antithesis of a non-story. So then you admit that it does not posit a realistic Taiwanese threat of being able to breach Three Gorges? Brooks R/JB |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PING: Gordon (was: The torpedo high jump...) | Yeff | Military Aviation | 0 | June 10th 04 08:41 AM |
Taiwan to make parts for new Bell military helicopters | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | February 28th 04 12:12 AM |
realign M-750 to reduce noise in Taiwan | Dan Jacobson | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | January 31st 04 01:44 AM |
US wants Taiwan to bolster intelligence gathering | Henry J. Cobb | Military Aviation | 0 | January 8th 04 02:00 PM |
monitoring China air communication with a radio in Taiwan | Dan Jacobson | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | November 23rd 03 09:40 PM |