South China Sea - China vs US Navy?

[Ed Anger]

[grumbler]

#1, the regime is strengthened by liberating China--all of it.
#2, the Chinese (read: Maoist) definitions of "winning", "losing", and "shooting war" are very different than ours.

It would be an extremely grave error to define Chinese goals using western interpretations.

I'm with Mono.  A minor strengthening of the regime isn't worth risking the existence of the regime.  This is shadow play.  There is the real risk that miscalculations/misunderstandings will lead to war, but not much risk that there will be malicious intent on either side to start a war.

[Zoupa]

I believe China owns a lot of the US debt right?

If it did come to war (which, for the reasons posted above by grumbler, I don't think would happen), which side could hold it over the other for benefit?

I suck at economics, especially macro. Can the US say "suckers we aint paying you back", can the Chinese say "pay us back now or we blow up your financial system"?

[jimmy olsen]

Even if the Chinese can sink an aircraft carrier, the US submarine fleet remain's vastly superior and will be able to enforce a blockade of the Chinese coast and sink anything they put in the water.

[lustindarkness]

Bah! President Trump    will build a wall between us and China, and he will have Mexico pay for it.

[CountDeMoney]

I'm with Mono.  A minor strengthening of the regime isn't worth risking the existence of the regime.  This is shadow play.  There is the real risk that miscalculations/misunderstandings will lead to war, but not much risk that there will be malicious intent on either side to start a war.

This "shadow play" is a slicing of the salami over the course of decades;  the Chinese reunification with Taiwan is going to happen, one way or the other, and positioning themselves over years of escalation is how they are going to mitigate US involvement. 

As far as a war with the US is concerned, it is not about winning or losing: it is about achieving their goals by avoiding successful US intervention-or none at all--by making it too politically or militarily unpalatable for the US.

Granted, the Chinese do not possess experience in brinksmanship – which is why we see what we are seeing with increased frequency in the South China Sea – that could very well wind up getting shots fired, but maliciousness has nothing to do with reclaiming sovereign Chinese soil under the CCP. 

Regarding debt:  you can't put a price on nationalism. 

Regarding USN aircraft carriers:  I don't understand why people think they are any less fragile now than they were in 1945.  They are still ships, not Death Stars.

[Jacob]

Makes sense CdM.

Also, now I want salami.

EDIT: with the debt, I think it's something the US can hold over China if there's a full on conflict - i.e. if the US can say "we are not paying you what we owe" with sufficient reason that the full faith and credit of the US will not be questioned by others. Before then I'd imagine China could in theory play games with the US through the debt, but they'd have to be mindful not to screw over their own economy.

[Grinning_Colossus]

The carriers would be destroyed by guided missiles if they went anywhere near Mainland China. That's why land-based air from Taiwan and Japan is so important.

[Razgovory]

The carriers would be destroyed by guided missiles if they went anywhere near Mainland China. That's why land-based air from Taiwan and Japan is so important.

How will they be guided?

[Ed Anger]

The carriers would be destroyed by guided missiles if they went anywhere near Mainland China. That's why land-based air from Taiwan and Japan is so important.

How will they be guided?

Tiny chinese midgets in the nose.

[grumbler]

The carriers would be destroyed by guided missiles if they went anywhere near Mainland China. That's why land-based air from Taiwan and Japan is so important.

Carriers are not coastal craft.  You are not going to find them right off China's coast if tensions are high.  Out at sea, they are not nearly so vulnerable; targeting them isn't trivial, and striking them even when detected isn't easy because they won't be where they were when your weapons arrive.

The aircraft from the carrier will be more vulnerable than the carrier, unless the carrier doesn't have direct support subs.  Chinese subs are a far bigger threat to the carrier, over a campaign, than cruise missiles.  The US is pretty dependent on its own subs for ASW, in places like the South China Sea (in deeper water, Low Frequency Active is probably effective enough to detect most subs).

[Grey Fox]

China is not a self sufficient food country, without American imports starvation looms.

While they own USA debts.

Pah!

[CountDeMoney]

Chinese subs are a far bigger threat to the carrier, over a campaign, than cruise missiles.

[The Brain]

The carriers would be destroyed by guided missiles if they went anywhere near Mainland China. That's why land-based air from Taiwan and Japan is so important.

How will they be guided?

A lady holding a colorful little flag.

[Syt]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/26/asia/japan-china-jet-scrambled/index.html

East China Sea: Japan scrambles jets as China flies fleet near disputed islands

Tokyo (CNN)Japan scrambled fighter jets Sunday after China flew a fleet of aircraft near contested islands in the East China Sea.

Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said that the jets were sent up after eight Chinese military planes crossed between Okinawa and the Miyako islands near Taiwan. He said that two of the aircraft were thought to be fighter jets.

He added that the planes didn't "trespass" into Japan's territorial airspace, although he said it was the first time that Chinese military aircraft had been seen in the Miyako Strait.

The fleet included H-6k bombers, Su-30 fighters and air tankers.

"We will continue to keep close eyes on the Chinese military activities which have been expanding and become more frequent," he said.

Shen Jinke, an official with the People's Liberation Army Air Force, said that a fleet of 40 aircraft were sent to the West Pacific via the Miyako Strait Sunday for a "routine drill on the high seas," according to China's official Xinhua news agency.

The fleet, which included H-6K bombers, Su-30 fighters and air tankers, simulated reconnaissance and early warning attacks on sea-surface targets. It also conducted in-flight refueling to test the Air Force's fighting capacity, Xinhua added.

The report added that the fleet conducted routine patrols in China's Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), which the country set up in the East China Sea in 2013 despite objections from Tokyo and Washington.

Japan rejects the ADIZ, which encompasses disputed islands that are known as the Senkakus in Japan and Diaoyu in China.

Shen said the drills and patrols were conducted "in accordance with the needs of the Air Force to defend national sovereignty and security, as well as to maintain peaceful development."

Both China and Japan claim ownership of the islands and tensions have flared numerous times in recent years.

While they are uninhabited, their ownership would allow for exclusive oil, mineral and fishing rights in the surrounding waters.

In mid-2014, Japanese and Chinese jets had a tense standoff in a region where both zones overlap, with Japan's Defense Minister saying the planes at one point came within 30 feet of each other.

Japan also has an ADIZ over the islands, which it administers.

Tension over the island dispute has in the past spilled over into protests and violence against Japanese-owned businesses in China.

The Senkaku/Diaoyu islands are by no means the only islands whose ownership China disputes.

READ: South China Sea: China may establish ADIZ

Beijing claims the majority of the South China Sea as part of its territory, which has led to heightened tensions and frequent disputes with its neighbors there.