• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Deploying Jets Around Asia to Keep China Surrounded

China intends to knock us off our perch. I'd rather not see that happen. I'd rather see the U.S. remain numero uno, you know? So, encircling China, and being all threatening like, while saying we're not being threatening like, is what's in store for the foreseeable future, as we will undoubtedly safeguard our position in the world with everything we've got, as we very well should.

They're beating us economically because they're acting smarter right now. You're telling me you get so furious that they're beating us economically, that you want to start threatening them? Do you hang outside your neighbors house with a gun because he has a nicer car?

Why don't instead we use those trillions we'd spend on military on our infrastructure instead.
 
Get your facts straight. The EP-3 you are referring to wasn't forced to land in China. the crew had a choice, ditch the plane in the South China Sea or request permission from China to make an emergency landing on Hainan.

And where did G.W. Bush back down ? The Chinese did exactly the same thing that we would have if a Chinese aircraft would have landed on Guam
Yes, that's the same Guam island that a Democrat said would tip over if we put too many Marines on the island.

For a guy who won't say what squadron of which branch had only one aircraft available you all of a sudden want to pick nits :roll:

Does 'unable to complete it's mission and had to make an emergency landing after a collision with a Chinese fighter giving the Chinese an American spy plane to look over' tighten it up enough for ya?

He sent a letter of apology he claims wasn't but none the less was a cow-tow to the commies.

To use your suddenly solid nit picking- the Chinese were not snooping just off Guam on a routine basis when a mid air collision takes place forcing the Chinese aircrew to make a choice, swim or land on 'enemy' soil giving the 'enemy' a top secret spy plane to look over.

But of course you would rather nit pick than take in the bigger picture-

There is absolutely no need to 'ring China' with planes when the Russians share so large a border with China. It is more a stunt to try and gain funding. It will not curtail cyber warfare. The proposed deployments are a year away at best and more like a series of photo-op partnerships than any ring of flying steel.

far more proposed stunt than any 'stabilization' plan. Far more a 'we need more money' stunt than a defend freedom exercise.
 
They're beating us economically because they're acting smarter right now. You're telling me you get so furious that they're beating us economically, that you want to start threatening them? Do you hang outside your neighbors house with a gun because he has a nicer car?

Why don't instead we use those trillions we'd spend on military on our infrastructure instead.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this issue, I'm afraid, man. China is a significant threat to the United States, and while I don't always agree with every policy our lawmakers or President enact, I fully support safeguarding our nation from threats like China.
 
For a guy who won't say what squadron of which branch had only one aircraft available you all of a sudden want to pick nits :roll:.

Sure not going say to much with the current individuals who are sitting in the White House.

It's not about me but there are tens of thousands in the military looking at each other and wondering if they are next on the hit list.

For the first time in America's history the DoD has been politicized and the current administration is in the process of defining the purpose and what the character of the U.S. military will be.
 
We have both the numbers, the experience, and the technology at least for the forseeable future. The size and technical sophistication of our air and naval arms are far greater than our Chinese counter-parts and further augmented by our strong string of allies that encircle China from it's northern periphery down to the South China Sea.

Who is the ally north to China?
 
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this issue, I'm afraid, man. China is a significant threat to the United States, and while I don't always agree with every policy our lawmakers or President enact, I fully support safeguarding our nation from threats like China.

Man, it's logic like this that gets us into war after war after war. They're beating us at our own game: capitalism, and now you want to get so upset that the blood of millions should flow in the streets.

I haven't seen any aggressive behavior on their part, and nothing but aggressive behavior on ours. If we are having problems with their hackers (we hack them back so it's rather hypocritical for you to act so offended about it), we can just improve our security. No bloodshed required.

Do you believe that if we kill them hard enough our economy will surpass theirs? I'll never understand war-mongering.
 
Last edited:
Sure not going say to much with the current individuals who are sitting in the White House. It's not about me but there are tens of thousands in the military looking at each other and wondering if they are next on the hit list. For the first time in America's history the DoD has been politicized and the current administration is in the process of defining the purpose and what the character of the U.S. military will be.

Ahhhh you are SOOOO noble. There have been published maps with the squadrons to be cut, their op stat, and other details but you can't name one squadron? Generals went on the record to say proficiency would be hurt and take months to recover but you can't name a single squadron?

Sounds like yet another Apacherat no fact just rant bit to me.

Oh this isn't the first time for anything at the DoD- you seem rather poor of memory if you can't recall DefSec Rummy and his snowflakes. You are quick to do the diva.... slow to provide any facts on what you claim is or isn't happening... :roll:
 
With all due respect, how many wars has the United States been involved in during the same time period. And, a Chinese imperial period? When was that exactly, except to effect their own landmass? Remember, the UK, with help from the United States during the Boxer Rebellion of the late 19th Century, fought the Chinese in order to keep the drug trade open to profiteer merchants and shipping magnants from both countries.

Goodness. Please.

Firstly, whatever the US did has nothing to do with what China has done, to say that the United States has been globally active for a century is not to say that China has not been globally active ever. We're talking about China here.

Secondly, by "Imperial China" I didn't mean Imperial in the since that the British Empire was Imperial, conquering far off lands and establishing an empire, what I meant was simply to refer to the times before 1912 when the Republic of China was established, ie when there was a Chinese Emperor ie the Qing Dynasty and everything before that. Also, while many of us like to think of modern day China and being what China has always been, but that hasn't been the case. All throughout history when China was strong it would make subjects out of its neighbors, Korea, Mongolia, Tibet, East Turkmenistan; and Tibet and East Turkmenistan are under Chinese control today. Also depending on how you define "Chinese" because in the strictest you could consider the Southern parts of China, where Wu used to be more commonly spoken has not truely Chinese and thus also an Imperial Conquest as often was the case when they were subjects of their northern counterparts.

Ethnolinguistic_map_of_China_1983.jpg
 
Ahhhh you are SOOOO noble. There have been published maps with the squadrons to be cut, their op stat, and other details but you can't name one squadron? Generals went on the record to say proficiency would be hurt and take months to recover but you can't name a single squadron?

Sounds like yet another Apacherat no fact just rant bit to me.

Oh this isn't the first time for anything at the DoD- you seem rather poor of memory if you can't recall DefSec Rummy and his snowflakes. You are quick to do the diva.... slow to provide any facts on what you claim is or isn't happening... :roll:

Don't remember Rumsfeld ever trying to redefining what the character of the U.S. military should be.

The identity of which squadrons that were forward deployed is not classified information. They can be found on base newspapers, local newspapers, and even on the DoD Defense Link website. I have my own reason for not identifying certain squadrons that were deployed.
 
To use your suddenly solid nit picking- the Chinese were not snooping just off Guam on a routine basis when a mid air collision takes place forcing the Chinese aircrew to make a choice, swim or land on 'enemy' soil giving the 'enemy' a top secret spy plane to look over.

.

The Chinese are snooping and pooping off of Guam today.

Even Putin is laughing at Obama every time he sends Russian bombers to fly circles around Guam.
 
Don't remember Rumsfeld ever trying to redefining what the character of the U.S. military should be.

The identity of which squadrons that were forward deployed is not classified information. They can be found on base newspapers, local newspapers, and even on the DoD Defense Link website. I have my own reason for not identifying certain squadrons that were deployed.

What character is that?

Hmmm there are links that identify the squadrons that had only one operational plane? I doubt that, you do this a lot, claim stuff and then claim you can't tell... :roll:

All I see is wiggle wiggle wiggle....
 
The Chinese are snooping and pooping off of Guam today.

Even Putin is laughing at Obama every time he sends Russian bombers to fly circles around Guam.

Got a link for that ahhhh 'fact' you claim? All I can find is China has occasionally gotten close to Guam but no where near the frequency we do along china's coast which is daily.

Your Putin comment is typical Apacherat nonsense.... if Putin laughs everytime he sends bombers to fly circles around Guam he doesn't laugh much.

Links, try something to back your crap up beside bias....
 
What character is that?

Hmmm there are links that identify the squadrons that had only one operational plane? I doubt that, you do this a lot, claim stuff and then claim you can't tell... :roll:

All I see is wiggle wiggle wiggle....

Today under Obama, just like back during the hollow military of the late 1970's there are days when only 50 % 0f the aircraft can fly mostly because of the lack of maintenance or spare parts. That was the norm back during the Clinton administration.

Today that seems to be the norm, one day all of the aircraft can fly and the next day only half can fly. On one particular day one squadron only had one aircraft able to fly.

Any time when 50 % of the aircraft can't fly in a squadron there's a problem.

Today we have a hollow military force.

A few years ago Congress found out that 23 % of Obama's Navy ships were incapable from casting off and weighing anchor and putting to sea and being able to fight because of the lack of maintenance. The U.S. Navy fleet is rusting away while tied up to wharfs.

Today it's even worse, we have 11 carriers and Obama is having problems keeping two at sea. The past eleven Presidents as being the Cn'C of the military were always able to have a CBG/CSG in every one of the Navy's AOR's. Today Obama has problems keeping two CSG at sea covering only two of the Navy's five AOR's.
 
Got a link for that ahhhh 'fact' you claim? All I can find is China has occasionally gotten close to Guam but no where near the frequency we do along china's coast which is daily.

Your Putin comment is typical Apacherat nonsense.... if Putin laughs everytime he sends bombers to fly circles around Guam he doesn't laugh much.

Links, try something to back your crap up beside bias....

You must be one of those "low information voters" I keep hearing about. Don't you get the newspaper delivered to your house every morning ? If your going to rely on the internet as your main source for the news, your uninformed. At least try staying half ass informed and watch Fox News.

China Now Conducting Naval Spy Missions Off Hawaii and Guam

>" In testimony yesterday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Admiral Samuel J. Locklear, the commander-in-chief of U.S. Pacific Command (CINPAC), revealed that in 2012, Chinese naval units conducted for the first time intelligence collection missions against U.S. naval forces in the Indian Ocean, and Chinese naval intelligence collectors operated off Hawaii and the island of Guam monitoring the activities of U.S. military forces. "<

China Now Conducting Naval Spy Missions Off Hawaii and Guam - Matthew Aid



>"Larry Wortzel, a former military intelligence official and specialist on China, said the Chinese military has sent intelligence collection ships into Guam’s economic zone and also the zone around the Hawaiian islands. "<

China encircles U.S. by sailing warships in American waters, arming neighbors - Washington Times
 
You must be one of those "low information voters" I keep hearing about. Don't you get the newspaper delivered to your house every morning ? If your going to rely on the internet as your main source for the news, your uninformed. At least try staying half ass informed and watch Fox News.

China Now Conducting Naval Spy Missions Off Hawaii and Guam

>" In testimony yesterday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Admiral Samuel J. Locklear, the commander-in-chief of U.S. Pacific Command (CINPAC), revealed that in 2012, Chinese naval units conducted for the first time intelligence collection missions against U.S. naval forces in the Indian Ocean, and Chinese naval intelligence collectors operated off Hawaii and the island of Guam monitoring the activities of U.S. military forces. "<

China Now Conducting Naval Spy Missions Off Hawaii and Guam - Matthew Aid



>"Larry Wortzel, a former military intelligence official and specialist on China, said the Chinese military has sent intelligence collection ships into Guam’s economic zone and also the zone around the Hawaiian islands. "<

China encircles U.S. by sailing warships in American waters, arming neighbors - Washington Times

There ya go again, spinning the occasional flight or ship into some cold war constant mission----umm like we do china daily. :roll:

We have played this game a few months ago- China has started expanding their flights and cruises but they pale in comparison to what we do daily around China. I'd call it the very occasional tit for tat seeing we think little of entering their economic zone which FYI there is no law against passage through the economic zone which is a band 200 miles out to sea. FYI the EP3 was 70 miles off the island when the collision occurred, well inside the economic zone.

So drum on and while you are enlightening me how about a link to the one plane squadron? You seem to link crap but dodge my big question which pertains the the OP.

Put as much lipstick as you can on this...it is still a pig...
 
There ya go again, spinning the occasional flight or ship into some cold war constant mission----umm like we do china daily. :roll:

We have played this game a few months ago- China has started expanding their flights and cruises but they pale in comparison to what we do daily around China. I'd call it the very occasional tit for tat seeing we think little of entering their economic zone which FYI there is no law against passage through the economic zone which is a band 200 miles out to sea. FYI the EP3 was 70 miles off the island when the collision occurred, well inside the economic zone.

So drum on and while you are enlightening me how about a link to the one plane squadron? You seem to link crap but dodge my big question which pertains the the OP.

Put as much lipstick as you can on this...it is still a pig...

Do you see liberal in my profile ? I know the diffrance between territorial waters, contiguous zones, and maritme economic zones

Marine Regions

I'm old enough to remember when the terrtorial bounderis were only 3 miles from shore. When Soviets subs laid off of El Segundo, Ca gathering intelligence and Soviet naval intelligence ships would sit four miles off of Guam and would radio to North Vietnam every time a B-52 took off to bomb Hanoi.

Today it's 12 miles. Beyond 12 miles starts the maritime economic zone.
 
Do you see liberal in my profile ? I know the diffrance between territorial waters, contiguous zones, and maritme economic zones Marine Regions I'm old enough to remember when the terrtorial bounderis were only 3 miles from shore. When Soviets subs laid off of El Segundo, Ca gathering intelligence and Soviet naval intelligence ships would sit four miles off of Guam and would radio to North Vietnam every time a B-52 took off to bomb Hanoi. Today it's 12 miles. Beyond 12 miles starts the maritime economic zone.

More deflection from the facts, the point is even your links can't say how many or how often any Chinese passage within 200 miles of any US Territory occurred/occurs. Sounds a lot like the attempted fright attack some Cons tried about Russian subs in the Gulf of Mexico and trying to say the subs were Putin thumbing his nose at us... :roll:

The last link of yours was pure crap... China 'arms' our neighbors as part of a Red sea rising crap piece, more like a few countries don't want to buy our high priced high level of maintenance systems for their part of the world.

FYI the Soviets didn't have to sit off Guam to alert the Vietnamese- high flying B52s showed on radar with enough lead time for the air defenses to be more than ready. The Soviets wanted a most excellent opportunity to listen to, record radar data and frequencies used by the planes used by SAC and their use in the conventional role in SE Asia gave them huge volumes of intel. But Apacherat drags that in here to deflect from the issue at hand.

Fact is deploying US planes around China is a nonstarter, there will be no real support for any sort of operations past a few joint flights. More a silly play for more funding by creating a 'need' due to operational tempo now that the ME, SA wars are winding down.

But again, please tell us the squadron that only had ONE operational plane???? (smells like Apacherat invention to me)
 
More deflection from the facts, the point is even your links can't say how many or how often any Chinese passage within 200 miles of any US Territory occurred/occurs.

Right now I bet there are a minimum of a half dozen PLO/Navy ships sitting in the port of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Who do you think operates the Panama Canal today ?
 
Right now I bet there are a minimum of a half dozen PLO/Navy ships sitting in the port of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Who do you think operates the Panama Canal today ?

And you are right there- go take a few pics... SOMETHING to back your rants up.

So what does this deflection about the canal have to do with planes around China, who operates the canal has been operating it for quite some time now. No problems, no worries, just more Con whine....
 
(smells like Apacherat invention to me)


The Soviet Union. Due to their relative lack of electronic listening posts overseas—in comparison to the Americans, who possessed signals intelligence (SIGINT) facilities throughout the world—the Soviets initially took the lead in the use of ships to gather intelligence. From the 1950s, they began using what came to be their preferred intelligence-gathering craft, a fishing trawler. The design of the trawler, which was made to store many days' catch in insulated compartments, made it ideal for extensive activities below deck.

As the Cold War continued, the Soviets expanded and improved their intelligence-collection ships, known to U.S. intelligence as AGIs, the AG being code for "miscellaneous auxiliary" and the I a designator of enemy craft. Later models were designed and built specifically to serve as collection platforms. Eventually they became large enough to include on-board intelligence processing facilities, greatly improving the speed with which raw data became usable intelligence for Soviet operatives.

During the Vietnam War, a pair of Soviet AGIs, one near Guam and the other in Vietnam's Gulf of Tonkin, kept a close watch on U.S. forces, and in some cases may have provided Hanoi with advance notice of U.S. airstrikes. Near the end of the Cold War, the Soviets had a fleet of about five dozen AGIs dispatched throughout the globe. A particular area of interest lay just to the east of Florida, in international waters and close to friendly ports in Cuba, from which Soviet AGIs could monitor activities at U.S. naval bases in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.

Ships Designed for Intelligence Collection - The Soviet Union, The United States
 
And you are right there- go take a few pics... SOMETHING to back your rants up.

So what does this deflection about the canal have to do with planes around China, who operates the canal has been operating it for quite some time now. No problems, no worries, just more Con whine....

>"Currently the Panama Ports Company, a subsidiary of Hutchison Whampoa Ltd.,[ii] has exclusive and extensive rights to control both ends of the Panama Canal. Hutchison Whampoa is a Chinese company owned by Hong Kong billionaire, Li Ka-Shing, who has strong ties with Beijing. Considering Li’s close ties with the Chinese government, it is highly plausible that Hutchison Whampoa has the potential to act as Beijing’s political agent and that their possession of the ports at either end of the Panama Canal constitutes a serious U.S. national security issue."< The Menges' Americas Report: China’s Control of the Panama Canal Revisited.
 
And you are right there- go take a few pics... SOMETHING to back your rants up.

....

Like I informed you before, I'm not your you know what.

If you're not capable of doing your own research, lets set up a Pay-Pal account so I can make a buck doing research for you.

Re: COSCO ships in the port of Los Angeles / Long Beach I find this tool very helpful keeping track where all the ships in the world are at.
Live Ships Map - AIS - Vessel Traffic and Positions

BTW: COSCO is actualy part of the PLO/Navy. All of the officers and many of the crew are members of the PLO/Navy.
 
The Soviet Union. Due to their relative lack of electronic listening posts overseas—in comparison to the Americans, who possessed signals intelligence (SIGINT) facilities throughout the world—the Soviets initially took the lead in the use of ships to gather intelligence. From the 1950s, they began using what came to be their preferred intelligence-gathering craft, a fishing trawler. The design of the trawler, which was made to store many days' catch in insulated compartments, made it ideal for extensive activities below deck.

As the Cold War continued, the Soviets expanded and improved their intelligence-collection ships, known to U.S. intelligence as AGIs, the AG being code for "miscellaneous auxiliary" and the I a designator of enemy craft. Later models were designed and built specifically to serve as collection platforms. Eventually they became large enough to include on-board intelligence processing facilities, greatly improving the speed with which raw data became usable intelligence for Soviet operatives.

During the Vietnam War, a pair of Soviet AGIs, one near Guam and the other in Vietnam's Gulf of Tonkin, kept a close watch on U.S. forces, and in some cases may have provided Hanoi with advance notice of U.S. airstrikes. Near the end of the Cold War, the Soviets had a fleet of about five dozen AGIs dispatched throughout the globe. A particular area of interest lay just to the east of Florida, in international waters and close to friendly ports in Cuba, from which Soviet AGIs could monitor activities at U.S. naval bases in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.

Ships Designed for Intelligence Collection - The Soviet Union, The United States

More Apacherat crap. Your own reference can do no more that say MAY have given given advanced notice.... as if the rather intense AD systems of Hanoi needed that when it comes to B52s... :roll:

But like I stated sending the B52s on a rather clockwork like mission sequence did provide the Soviets with an excellent opportunity to get up close and personal with the B52 they couldn't get elsewhere.

Howsomever this is just more deflection from the unsupportable crap you keep shoveling about Chinese circling Guam... you can dodge all you want but the issue is China doesn't threaten us in any way outside of it's territorial waters.

The OP about planes around china is pure snot AND you can't back any of your crap up to include the one plane squadron you claim was 'operational' during some build-up.

Just Apacherat rant.
 
Back
Top Bottom