It is indeed a worrying trend that USA in the past didn't challenge China as much as it should and allowed it to grow, it was VERY obvious that China is bullying its neighbor countries and USA basically just "condemn" China's military action in South China Sea and didn't do jack chit.

USA definitely need to step up their military in terms of controlling China's aggressive behavior toward South China Sea. It's extremely worrying that China is taking more and more control in South China Sea - There's this sentiment that if the CCP can't hide/handle China's economic slow down or falling, they will turn the media/citizens' attention to Taiwan and it's very possible they attack Taiwan to shift away the economic downturn. Taiwan is a huge part of the USA strategy in Asia and USA really needs to step it up there and be more firm on its stand on the Taiwan/China issue. Also, most Taiwanese(especially younger generation) rather ally with the USA than kneeing down to the CCP at this moment.

For Africa, it is very hard to tell what's gonna happen but since most Africa countries are somehow quite currupted, it's likely that the Africa countries' leaders will just take their RMB from CCP and let CCP do whatever they want in Africa. On the other hand though, Africans might become anti-Chinese as Indonesian did back in the days and everything CCP tried to build in Africa will collapse very quick.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_19...s_of_Indonesiahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discri...se_Indonesians

Those lucky bastards get to eat Chinese food every day.

The PLA are deadset on making American carriers a non-factor in any conflict.

Chinese Drones:

Soar Dragon



Divine Eagle



Sharp Sword

Report to Congress on China Naval Modernization
https://news.usni.org/2019/09/25/rep...-modernization

Report:https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...ns-for-U-S.pdf

Meh - this is all just a bunch of horsesh*t to justify our bloated military budget.

Reality check:

US military budget (2019): $700 billion
Chinese military budget (2019): $240 billion

That's us spending more than 3x as much as the Chinese, and before some of you dipsh*ts whine about how the Chinese hide part of their budget... so do we! US quoted military budget does not include the nuclear weapons program, the VA medical system, wartime spending (Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc), and other misc items. So both budgets are understated.

As for the supposedly "big" Chinese navy, note it's only big in #'s, not tonnage, which is what really matters because it gives a more accurate idea of true naval size. China has lots of tiny ships that can operate in coastal waters only. US has a smaller # of much bigger, much more capable ships. A PT boat does not equal a destroyer you f*cking idiots! A frigate does not equal an aircraft carrier.

Same with warplanes, tanks, artillery, drones, everything. The qualitative difference is insane.

China is a paper tiger that ironically gets some of its best promotion from western defense "experts", all of whom love military spending and are always looking for new ways to justify it.

China's modernization is unprecedented and has a lot of people in the DoD spooked. You can use whatever narrative you want about them not being a threat but they know what they want and they're going for it very aggressively. What they've accomplished in the last twenty years, economically and militarily speaks for itself.

I hate to say it but I'm a little excited for China's Anniversary parade next month. ONLY because they are expected to reveal a stealth bomber that's been under development that's rumored to be a copycat of our B-2 bomber. This would make them the only other country in the world, besides the United States, to have one. If this turns out to be valid, then it's easier to see why the United States sees China as a threat going into the future. What do you need a stealth bomber for?


Mass show of advanced military aircraft set for China’s National Day paradehttps://www.scmp.com/news/china/mili...s-national-day

The United States performing FONOPs (Freedom of Navigation Operations) is the only thing standing between China and territorial claims in the SCS. People question the US's foreign involvement in some areas, but it's things like this that are why we have such a large military.

Not to make this political but it's very relevant, there were only 6 of these conducted during the 8 years of Obama's presidency. We are now doing this monthly and that will more than likely increase.


Chinese coastguard ships ‘deliberately visible in South China Sea to assert sovereignty’https://www.scmp.com/news/china/dipl...outh-china-sea

You can take cheap shots at Chinese quality all you want but there is strength in numbers.



China Launches First Type 075 Big Deck Amphibious Warshiphttps://news.usni.org/2019/09/27/chi...ibious-warship

Afghanistan, you say? Hmmm....

they are inching their way for the inevitable conflict to take back taiwan. it'll be a few more years until they can establish a capable amphibious force to storm their beaches

You're right and it's their main priority and why we can't abandon Taiwan.

To put it plainly, China wants to achieve absolute victory in any potential conflict with Taiwan. As in, they will stack the cards so far in their favor that there will be nothing the US can conventionally do to stop them, short of nuclear war. Their whole military is being built up to make the Western Pacific off-limits to the United States and we don't have a large enough presence there to help slow that down yet. No country also wants to host additional US Military bases and that's a problem. Australia's been kind of mum about the US Presence there. It'll be one of those things where people are going to cry for the US's help once China's military is large enough and by then it'll be too late.

What China is doing in the SCS, is a preview of what they will be doing across Oceana. They're going to sail so many naval and fishing vessels to assert themselves that it'll make countries there really uncomfortable. This is exactly what they are doing right now in the South China Sea and even the Philippines, who has decried America and warmed up to China, doesn't like what's going on.

[QUOTE=OttomanEmpire post_id=1588702921][img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/China_Military_Budget_2012.png/800px-China_Military_Budget_2012.png[/im]

[img]https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QzP4SxdGaCs/WC9oCFu6avI/AAAAAAABP7I/_z0QNzjH0gw4lrYDGAIJEtpywcUzmX9jwCLcB/s1600/world2030.png[/im]

[img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TEZRXk_7I6A/UvKI_MOa2gI/AAAAAAAAtnY/LdxXh0TbJZA/s1600/mb13-chinae28093us-defence-spending-projections.jpg[/im][/QUOTE]China wants the have complete control over Taiwan but it's not in its immediate interest to do that because Taiwan is economically important to Chinese businesses and there's really no reason for it right now. At some point this will change, and China will want to hold onto Taiwan. This will more than likely occur before the West and China completely divorce because China doesn't want to risk losing Taiwan. If the Chinese succeed against Taiwan, this will be a great victory for the CCP and probably add a lust for more power as, militarily, typically they've had their **** pushed in, with regards to direct conflict. So them taking back Taiwan could contribute to a more assertive foreign policy strategy which would eventually challenge US interests abroad in a dangerous way. It's extremely important that China never gets to this point (besides the Morale value) and why the US needs to do everything it can to deny China this victory.

Add in the fact that to take back Taiwan, they would have to directly confront the United States in open war in order to make sure the United States doesn't stop their invasion of Taiwan, and the whole situation gets spicy. If the US receives an ass-whooping because China wants to deny the US any ability to affect their plans, that's not going to sit well with the US too. But that may end up being this century's Pearl Harbor (who knows). The Soviet Union and US never directly confronted one another in combat, not like this anyways. There are classified systems that the United States has developed over the last couple decades that have never seen the light of day and people in the Department of Defense are trying to push for these to be publicly made available, so that they can be used as a deterrent.

OttomanEmpire - so even with all your charts and fearmongering, the Chinese are still going to be spending far less than the US in 2030. And these projections are no doubt based on the assumption of never-ending Chinese economic growth. They always do this with China to make them seem scarier.

Is anybody else tired of this bullsh*t? If you are well familiar with mlitary ops you'd know the Chinese are so hopelessly outclassed in every arena, especially AWACS, space, air power, and naval power. They're not very impressive on the ground either, to be honest. People who really know the US Armed Forces and the PLA also know we're in no danger of losing a war unless we b*tch out intentionally.

This is all just propaganda, shame on you impressionable people falling for it like sheep.

Too much to read in thread. Cliffs?

For any Aerospace Engineers in here, some of what China's been messing around with publicly lately:
[ul]

Experimental and numerical study of solid rocket scramjet combustor equipped with combined cavity and strut device

Flowfield structures of pylon-aided fuel injection into a supersonic crossflow

Low speed aerodynamic performance analysis of vortex lift waveriders with a wide-speed range

Robust tracking control of hypersonic flight vehicles: A continuous model-free control approach

Flame oscillation characteristics in a kerosene fueled dual mode combustor equipped with thin strut flameholder

Climbing performance analysis of rocket-based combined cycle engine powered aircraft

A novel approach for design and analysis of volume-improved osculating-cone waveriders

Investigation of ignition characteristics in a kerosene fueled supersonic combustor

Aeroheating reduction for blunt body using aerodome jet

Convolutional neural network based combustion mode classification for condition monitoring in the supersonic combustor

Experimental investigation of the effects of chamber length and boron content on boron-based gel fuel ramjet performance

Investigation of the mixing characteristics in a transverse hydrogen injection combustor with an inlet compression ramp

Drag and heat flux reduction induced by the pulsed counterflowing jet with different waveforms on a blunt body in supersonic flows

Mixing and combustion characteristics in a cavity-based supersonic combustor with different injection schemes

[/ul]

Recent Analyst Paper on China:


[b][u]Testimony: China’s military modernization program[/u][/b]

[QUOTE][b]Chinese Military Activities and Progress in the People’s Liberation Army’s Modernization in 2019[/b]

China’s military modernization program has continued apace, with defense spending growing for the 24th consecutive year, making China the second-largest defense spender after the United States. China spent an estimated $175.4 billion on defense in 2019, with funds going to personnel, training, and procurement. The increase in resources and effort has resulted in more frequent, sophisticated, and multifaceted People’s Liberation Army (PLA) presence and activities in the region and beyond. China’s main line of effort remains centered on East Asia, and its concerns are over the East China Sea, the South China Sea, and Taiwan. Below I capture the major developments in China’s regional activities with a focus on the South China Sea and China’s military presence beyond East Asia, as well as address recent developments in the SinoRussian relationship and the publication of the 2019 Chinese Defense White Paper.

[img]http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/china_military_innovation_growth_500293.png[/img]

[b]Regional Activities
[/b]
[b]Taiwan is the driving scenario for the PLA—in its training, procurement, reforms, and reorganization. Most Chinese military developments have implications for Taiwan.[/b][b]All of the Chinese navy’s platforms, both undersea and surface, could be used to coerce, blockade, attack, or invade Taiwan. [/b]China currently has the largest navy in the world, with 300 ships consisting of aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, submarines, and amphibious assault ships. The construction of the Type 095s nuclear attack submarine, which began in 2017, and the first Type 055 Nanchang destroyers that China will likely put in service this year could be useful to blockade Taiwan. The Chinese Air Force is also developing a new strategic stealth bomber called the Xian H-20. The H-20 will join the J-20 fighters, Y-20 airlifters, and Z-20 helicopters in the PLA Air Force’s “20” series of new aircraft. Many observers believe the “20” means they will be in service around the year 2020.[/b]

Chinese military improvements are especially concerning given China’s increasingly strident rhetoric over Taiwan. In his New Year’s Day speech, Xi Jinping warned Taiwan that unification is the ultimate goal of any talks over its future and any efforts by the island to assert full independence would be met by armed force.5 Based on this and subsequent speeches, it seems that Xi demands concrete progress toward reunification, though it is unclear exactly what that means. At the very least, China probably wants to restart bilateral talks and thus hopes that the political party in Taiwan that is more amenable to this path, the Kuomintang, will win the presidency in 2020.[/QUOTE][URL=http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Panel-II-Mastro_Written-Testimony-9.4.19.pdf]http://www.aei.org/wp-content/upload...ony-9.4.19.pdf[/URL]

Another analytical review of China's military modernization (a bit long):


[b][u]U.S.-China Relations in 2019: A Year in Review[/u][/b]

[QUOTE][b]Key Trends in U.S.-China Military Competition and Their Implications[/b]

The character of the Sino-American military competition is dynamic and open-ended. This is very unlikely to change over the foreseeable future. There are several principal reasons for this.

First, the competition is open-ended in that the two powers have conflicting fundamental interests and objectives that neither are willing to abandon. They also have the means to pursue these interests over an extended period of time. Thus the military competition will likely be protracted, with all that this implies for crafting an effective defense strategy.

Second, we are witnessing the maturation of the precision-strike regime, which was introduced in its earliest form by the United States military in the First Gulf War. After nearly 30 years of dominating this form of warfare, characterized by battle networks and precision-strike systems—what Russian military theorists call a “reconnaissance-strike complex”—these capabilities are being fielded by other militaries, with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) constituting the leading, or pacing, threat. This trend is highly unfavorable to the U.S. armed forces, as it represents the loss of several key advantages in the overall military competition. In particular, the PLA is deploying anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities designed to shift the military balance in the Western Pacific increasingly in China’s favor.

A third, related trend finds the military competition moving increasingly into relatively new domains, to include space, cyberspace and the seabed. The competition in these three domains is “offense-dominant,” which may have important implications for deterrence, and for military operations should deterrence fail. The American military appears to have an advantage in these domains, but the Chinese are working to close the gap.

Consistent with their strategic culture, the Chinese continue seeking opportunities to gain positional advantage. In particular, Beijing’s positioning military assets on South China Sea islands places them astride one of the world’s busiest trade routes, while also denying the Philippines and Vietnam strategic depth.

Finally, there is growing likelihood that the next decade or so will witness one or more disruptive shifts in the military competition—a military revolution. Among the new forms of warfare we may witness are:[ul][li][b]Algorithmic Warfare: [/b]operations dominated by artificial intelligence (AI) systems (such as robotic systems employing machine learning);[/li]
[li][b]Hyper War:[/b] operations conducted at unprecedented speeds, enabled by advanced cyber weaponry (such as malware developed and/or informed by AI); as well as directed energy and hypersonic weaponry; and/or[b][color=red][/color][/b][/li]
[li][b]“Precision” Biological Warfare:[/b] operations that are enabled by advances in genetic engineering techniques, such as CRISPR-Cas9, and synthetic biology.[/li]
[/ul]
Most likely we will see a mix of these new capabilities employed in combination with current forces.

From a U.S. perspective, the prospect of downstream disruptive shifts in war’s character can be viewed in both a positive and a negative light. It’s positive in the sense that it offers the U.S. military an opportunity to create new sources of competitive advantage, even as its existing advantages in precision-strike warfare fade. It’s negative in that the PLA may prove more adept than its American rival at exploiting the potential of these emerging technologies and their associated capabilities. Indeed, the U.S. defense establishment has shown itself to be slow in developing new warfighting concepts for great power competition, and exceedingly slow at fielding new capabilities.

[b]The Indo-Pacific Military Balance[/b]

At present, the overall Indo-Pacific military balance appears favorable to the United States, its allies, and like-minded security partners.

It must be noted that a great many factors and assumptions are involved in determining the balance, in addition to the size and structure of a state’s armed forces. Consider, for example, geography. The military balance is likely to be more favorable to China in a clash with the United States over Taiwan than it would be in a contest over islands in the South China Sea, or for control of the Indian Ocean sea lines of communication, or in blockade/counter-blockade operations. Time is another major factor in calculating the balance, such as the time each side would have to mobilize forces prior to the onset of hostilities. Time also plays a role in terms of the balance of forces across the length of a conflict which, in the case of wars between great powers, is often protracted. This relates to how quickly a side’s ability and will to continue fighting may be exhausted. Then there is the form the fighting takes. As recent history shows, the U.S. military is far more effective in waging conventional war against an adversary equipped and waging this form of war, than it is in conducting counterinsurgency operations.

Although the overall balance appears to favor the United States, for nearly two decades now it has shifted increasingly in China’s favor across the four dimensions relating to military strategy. They are:[ul][li][b]The Logistical Dimension:[/b] China’s economic growth rate continues to surpass that of the United States and its principal allies in the region. The PLA’s budget continues growing at a higher rate than the U.S. defense budget. Both China and the United States, however, show signs of structural and fiscal weakness that could exert great influence on their ability to support an open-ended military competition.[vi][/li]
[li][b]The Technological Dimension:[/b] Much of the military-related technologies underlying the maturation of the precision-strike regime, as well as the prospects for a military revolution, are being developed in the public sector, and are generally available to those with the resources to acquire them (or skill to steal them, or the economic leverage to coerce access to them). China has made it a priority to establish world-class competence in many key technologies (AI, Biosciences, Hypersonics, Quantum Computing) that will likely exert a significant influence on the military competition. The U.S. weakness here stems primarily from a lack of national purpose in this area of the competition, and its lack of competence in time-based competition—the ability to translate rapidly emerging military-related technologies into fielded military systems.[/li]
[li][b]The Operational Dimension: [/b]The PLA appears to know what it needs to do to conduct an offensive campaign in the Western Pacific, and is going about fielding a military capable of doing it. Toward this end it is working to field forces and conduct operations designed to establish air and sea control, along with the information dominance required to enable such a campaign.[/li]
[/ul]
The U.S. military, on the other hand, has yet to develop anything like the detailed operational concept for defending the nation’s vital interests and security obligations in the Western Pacific that it had during the Cold War for Europe. While the latest U.S. National Defense Strategy directs the military services to work on developing innovative operational concepts, progress to date has been astonishingly slow. Such operational concepts that have been developed on the U.S. side have come primarily from members of the strategic studies community, not America’s military professionals.

[b]The Chinese are putting their limited resources to good use, building capabilities designed to create strengths that can be leveraged to transform the U.S. military’s strengths into weaknesses. Thus we see the PLA emphasizing attacking the U.S. military’s “nervous system” with its anti-satellite (ASAT) systems and cyber malware, as well as its deployment of missile and other strike forces designed to hold at risk the American armed force’s “muscle:” its handful of forward air bases and aircraft carriers.[/b]

The United States defense investments are, in some important ways, underwriting China’s strategy. The U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy continue investing heavily in capabilities the PLA is focusing on holding at risk. Both Services plan to procure large numbers of relatively short-range, or tactical, aircraft like the F-35 that operate from increasingly vulnerable carriers or forward air bases. Meanwhile, the Air Force’s aging penetrating bomber fleet comprises only a handful of B-2s, with its follow-on bomber, the B-21, not projected to enter service until the middle of the next decade, at the earliest. The Navy’s unmanned aircraft program, the MQ-25, is being designed as a tanker to support its short-range tactical aircraft, rather than as a long-range penetrating reconnaissance-strike system. Moreover, the Navy’s SSGN four-boat fleet is reaching the end of its service life, with no follow-on system in sight.

The U.S. military continues relying on large, increasingly vulnerable satellites as critical elements of its battle network, especially for communications as well as for precision navigation and timing. To be sure, alternatives to the current satellite constellation are likely to prove either challenging to develop and/or expensive to procure.

In summary, based on an assessment of open-sourced intelligence, the Chinese are much superior to their American rivals when it comes to pursuing strategies that develop strengths to align against their rival’s weaknesses.
[b]
The Social Dimension: Given the United States’ progressively weakening fiscal standing, sustaining an [u]open-ended military competition with China will very likely require significant sacrifices on the American people’s part[/u], if not in the near term almost certainly by the end of the coming decade. The same might be true of the Chinese people. But the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) appears to have an advantage when it comes to getting its people to “eat bitterness.” The Party also appears to have bested America’s political elite in mobilizing their people to support such an effort. The Social Dimension of the competition is, in my estimation, where U.S. competitiveness is most lacking.[/b][/QUOTE][URL=https://www.hudson.org/research/15326-testimony-u-s-china-relations-in-2019-a-year-in-review]https://www.hudson.org/research/1532...year-in-review[/URL]

Awesome thread OP, no doubt China is currently a formidable foe and growing stronger by the day. What really scares me is their attention to anti-ship missiles that can destroy carriers with no defense available (that we know of). If and when chit pops off in the SCS, I wouldn't be surprised to see a volley of those launched first, but as you know that would spark a major war with China and possibly WW3, yikes.

To the naive posters itt, youre just that, naive. China has a formidable military that can inflict mass casualties and damage, its not all about our budget being bigger every year. Our advantages are slipping, a large part is due to the last administration that weakened us over almost a decade. China is serious, china is aggressive, and once the trade ware really starts to put the clamps to them who knows how they will lash out at US...

Interesting note about the PLA - finding recruits for the more demanding positions is one of the largest obstacles they face as it’s considered low class to be in the military.

We do have the Arleigh Burkes that provide an umbrella for carriers, any attack against an American carrier group would have to be pretty overwhelming (our carriers are surprisingly resilient). There's talk of actually putting VLS' on different classes of ships since the Navy is emphasizing the importance of network warfare. In theory, the missiles could be located on any ship, and fire control can be executed from any platform capable of doing so. A no-notice surprise attack could be possible but we have constant eyes on China and are always monitoring them. That's why their ASAT ability is important and a huge threat to us. If they are able to shut down satellite and high altitude ISR, we can't see anything. They'll certainly have a mobilization advantage further down the line due to their geographical location, so they very well could pull something off. America just needs to make sure there are no more Middle Easts in the foreseeable future and has the capacity to avoid being sucked into those situations (*cough*Iran*cough*).

It is kind of scary though, as noted in the analysis above, China has focused very well on being able to counter every strength the American military has.

It's hard to say how the future will play out in this regard. We know the plans of the Chinese are very well thought out and deceptive. We know what their goals are (China 2050), America just needs an effective way to respond to them. Our previous administrations have failed us and now it's been placed in Trump's lap, our legislature is still a mess but at least views China as a bipartisan threat. We are still in the very beginning stages of all of this, so it's hard to picture a lot of what is being forecasted for them. They've definitely shown the determination and capability to get to where they want to be, those are the kind of intrinsic factors that need to be considered when looking at the big picture with where China's going.

Cliffs: China scary! Don’t question it or present facts, dammit! They so scary we need more military spending!

This thread is nothing but a fear mongering circle jerk.

Great job for USA spending more on military. Always great to prepare for the worst when facing a fascist dictator(who changed the law to become lifetime emperor in the 2nd largest economy in the world) than be sorry later. You can't just be ahead of CCP, you need to FAR ahead because they keep stealing your technology.