Do we all really want World War 3 ?

[kscarbel2]

11 minutes ago, grayhair said:

I call BS on Carl Schuster.  "fully independent intellectual property."   I don't think so.   The Chinese didn't suddenly, independently have a miraculous "vision" of projectiles propelled by plasma.  Rail gun technology has been around for quite a few years.  I dunno, I'm guessing at least 25 years.  Here's an articlre from sevral years ago and it wasn't new then. 

https://www.wired.com/2014/04/electromagnetic-railgun-launcher

It is. They have developed their own variant of a globally established engineering concept.

The key note for Americans to realize is, the Chinese are now self-developing high-end technology of all sorts. Typical of Asians, they are aggressive (go getters).

[kscarbel2]

China mobilises DF-26 ballistic missiles capable of sinking US warships in the South China Sea

Jack Kilbride, ABC News  /  January 10, 2019

Beijing has announced it has deployed intermediate ballistic missiles to the country's north-west region, saying the weapons have the capacity to destroy US ships entering disputed waters in the South China Sea.

The DF-26 missiles — which have been previously dubbed the 'Guam Killer' or 'Guam Express' by Chinese media and defence experts — are capable of carrying conventional or nuclear warheads.

They have a range of 4,500 kilometres, making them capable of reaching as far as Guam in the east and Indonesia in the south, providing Beijing with a powerful weapon as tensions continue to rise in the South China Sea.

Positioning the missiles deep in China's mainland made them more difficult to intercept as it allowed the missile to enter its final stages at a high speed.

The missiles were first displayed in 2015 and China confirmed they were now operational in April last year.

'They feel their time has come'

A day before the announcement, a US guided missile destroyer, the USS McCambell, passed through waters off the Paracel Islands — an area Beijing considers part of its territory — without permission.

The US called it a "freedom of navigation" operation, while Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang urged the US to "immediately cease this kind of provocation".

Late last year, Chinese Navy Rear Admiral Luo Yuan suggested Beijing could sink two US carriers in a bid to deter the US from entering the South China Sea.

Admiral Lou was quoted in Taiwanese media as stating that destroying two carrier would kill around 10,000 US personnel, claiming that this would be the best way to hurt the US as "America is most afraid of the death of its people."

Malcom Davis, senior analyst in defence strategy and capability at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told the ABC the missile deployment was significant, particularly on the back of the recent threats from China.

He said that up until now China only had the shorter range DF-21D in operation.

"They're putting real capabilities in play to back up their threats," Dr Davis said.

"Politically and strategically there is a growing risk of a conflict between China and Taiwan that could ultimately see China trying to sink US naval vessels, including aircraft carriers."

He said the move further demonstrated President Xi Jinping's determination to make China ready for war with the United States, either over Taiwan or the South China Sea.

"I worry that the Chinese are building up towards something in the next couple of years," Dr Davis said, adding that Mr Xi could look to make a strong statement on Taiwan as the centenary of the Chinese Communist Party approaches in 2021.

"The Chinese, in terms of the way they think, the way they see themselves in the world and the way they see the US, they feel that their time has come."

Last week Mr Xi told a meeting of top officials that China's armed forces must strengthen their sense of urgency and do everything they can to prepare for battle.

The mobilisation is the latest in a string of moves from China's defence forces.

Last week, a Chinese warship was pictured out at sea carrying what appeared to be an electromagnetic railgun, a weapon capable of firing hypersonic projectiles to hit targets hundreds of kilometres away in a matter of seconds.

But despite their recent moves giving them the capability to back up their threats, Dr Davis said it was highly unlikely that the Chinese were about to launch an attack, and it was unlikely that the move would deter the US presence in the region.

"Every carrier is supported by a naval taskforce of cruisers and destroyers which have sophisticated sea-based air defence systems on board that could potentially shoot down the incoming missiles.

"But it's a difficult thing to do."

Dr Davis said Chinese doctrine was to use a 'multi-domain attack' approach — firing a diverse barrage of missiles to create a complex problem for the Americans that would likely result in a loss of ships.

"When we talk about between the US and China, forget past conflicts where the Americans have had overwhelming technological advantage," Dr Davis said.

"Both sides are going to take heavy losses in that conflict."

[kscarbel2]

Reuters  /  January 13, 2019

The U.S. ambassador to Germany has warned companies involved in the construction of the Russian-led Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline that they could face sanctions if they stick to the project.

The pipeline, which would carry gas straight to Germany under the Baltic Sea, is driving a wedge between Germany and its allies as it would deprive Ukraine of the lucrative gas transit fees it currently enjoys.

U.S. Ambassador Richard Grenell addressed the issue in a letter sent to several companies.

“The letter reminds that any company operating in the Russian energy export pipeline sector is in danger under CAATSA of U.S. sanctions.”

Germany and other European allies accuse Washington of using its Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) to meddle in other counties’ foreign and energy policies due to its extraterritorial effect.

Russian gas giant Gazprom is implementing the project jointly with its Western partners - Uniper, Wintershall, Engie, Austria’s OMV and Anglo-Dutch group Shell.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said on Thursday that any U.S. sanctions against Nord Stream 2 would be the wrong way to solve the dispute and that questions of European energy policy had to be decided in Europe, not in the United States.

[kscarbel2]

Here we go again with US Inc. unreasonably telling other sovereign countries what they should and shouldn't do in their own neighborhoods.

So what if Ukraine loses the "lucrative gas transit fees". It's not our concern. Isn't that what a free market is all about? We can't lecture China about having a free market, and act oppositely in Europe.

If we're ever to lead the world again, we need to earn respect through reasonable foreign policy. Folks who bully others never scored any points with me.

 

[kscarbel2]

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/2019-ATA-SFR---SSCI.pdf?utm_source=Gov Delivery Email&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Media Contacts Email

[kscarbel2]

China to counter U.S. deployment of intermediate-range missiles in Asia

Reuters  /  August 5, 2019

BEIJING - China will take countermeasures if the U.S. deploys intermediate-range missiles in Asia, a Chinese foreign ministry official said on Tuesday.

Fu Cong, director general of the foreign ministry’s arms control department, made the comments in Beijing at a press briefing.

U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on Saturday in Australia that he was in favor of placing ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles in Asia relatively soon, possibly within months.

[kscarbel2]

US missiles are for defending U.S. soil.

So why would the US defense secretary suggest placing missiles on the other side of the world from where most US soil is?

This is how wars get started.

[JoeH]

8 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

US missiles are for defending U.S. soil.

So why would the US defense secretary suggest placing missiles on the other side of the world from where most US soil is?

This is how wars get started.

Keeping a semi active military keeps soldiers trained, keeps research happening.  If we sat on our doorstep and waited for someone to attack us we might get soft before it happens.  I'm not saying I support one way or the other, but we are the strongest country in the world, and have been for a long time, and there's reasons for that.  Yes in ww I and ww ii we rose to the occasion from a passive state, but that might not always work.