Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [TnT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And wouldn't you like to see Stevie Y. score just one more time? A great Canadian and team leader if there ever was one. Go Wings! someday....maybe...sigh

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [armytriguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Somebody is trying to scare people.

Most defense extimates say that China spends about $22 billion on military. Compare that to $400 billion plus for the U.S.

China's military expenses represent 1.7% of GDP, compared to the worldwide average of 3%.

China's military expenses are 8% of government costs, compared to the worldwide average of 15%.

China does have a strong position for a conflict with us. But we also have a strong position in that we could enact tariffs and quotas on their product which would severely impact their economy.

It is like MAD, only without nuclear weapons.

_____________________________________
You're not stuck in traffic. You ARE traffic.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [jkca1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Comparitively speaking if you kill 300 million Chinese and 200 million Americans using tactical nuclear weaponry I believe that the Chinese will bounce back before we do. We have to much reliance on technolody which would all go Pfttt with the EMP. Imagine both countries wake up and find themselves back in the late 1890s, who do you think will fare better?

The only invasion that might occur is from Mexico into the US and India/Russia into China. I don't think Canada wants Detroit back... ;)
I have news for you: if 500 million Chinese and Americans die in a nuclear war, ain't nobody going to bounce back.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [Fatmouse] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:

China does have a strong position for a conflict with us. But we also have a strong position in that we could enact tariffs and quotas on their product which would severely impact their economy.

It is like MAD, only without nuclear weapons.
What happens if China dumps its holdings of US Treasuries? They are the second-largest holder, I understand.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [Fatmouse] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would like to know how the defense "experts" know what China spends. Are these the same experts that didn't see the end of the cold war and saw WMDs in Iraq? China's books are not open so is this best guess technology? How do they arrive at the numbers? Please enlighten.

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [jkca1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I would like to know how the defense "experts" know what China spends."

First off, China's books are not completely closed. They tell us how much they spend. Here's an example from an article about increases:

"China plans to raise its expenditures for national defense by 21.83 billion yuan (US$2.6 billion) this year, or an 11.6 percent rise over 2003, Finance Minister Jin Renqing said in a budget report Saturday"

Secondly, when a country buys x number of tanks or missiles or aircraft, they pay a certain amount of money and that is pretty easy to calculate. So is the amount of fuel and food and supplies it takes to run a military or a specific exercise.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [Tridiot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very well written. Thats the kind of response I was hoping for that would enlighten and provide serious discussion. I appreciate your words. I would ask however what criteria you use when you say "And not many people have noticed that despite Rumsfeld's goal of modernizing our military, that we're doing a pretty piss poor job of it. The planning itself might be pretty decent, but the execution is rather poor." Transforming any organization as large as the military takes time. Its only observational from my foxhole but I think things are going as well as could be expected. Of ourse there is resistance from the "old dinasaurs" that don't want change but that was expected.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [M.E.T.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I did a quick search and I can't seem to find anything that would indicate our military buildup started until after Reagan was sworn in and really with the Tower commission. From The National Archives. Would welcome anything you have to show something else.



John Tower Chairmanship (1981-85)

The chairmanship of John Tower (R-TX) was inevitably associated with the exhilaration of the largest peacetime expansion of the defense budget in the nation's history. By placing the Senate Armed Services Committee at the forefront of rebuilding the national defenses, Chairman Tower made a permanent imprint on the committee. He began by replacing the subcommittee structure that Senator Stennis created with a new one that reflected the major military missions of defense policy.

Chairman Tower brought to a culmination the 20-year process of expanding the annual defense authorization requirement. As ranking minority member of the committee in the 96th Congress (1979-81), Senator Tower led the drive to require authorization of operations and maintenance accounts. In 1982, the committee required authorization for procurement of ammunition and "other procurement." When the committee expanded the requirement to include working capital funds, virtually the entire defense budget was subject to authorization prior to appropriations.

Chairman Tower was intimately involved in the formulation of the Ronald W. Reagan administration's defense request, a sharp departure from the practice of previous committee chairs. Senator Tower and committee staff helped formulate the Fiscal Year 1982 Defense Authorization bill, which they regarded as "the blueprint' and the "stepping stone in the Reagan defense buildup." Finally, the Armed Services Committee reported its first Omnibus Defense Authorization bill in 1983 which departed from the pattern of reporting separate authorization bills.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:

China does have a strong position for a conflict with us. But we also have a strong position in that we could enact tariffs and quotas on their product which would severely impact their economy.

It is like MAD, only without nuclear weapons.
What happens if China dumps its holdings of US Treasuries? They are the second-largest holder, I understand.
That's what I meant when I said China has a strong position for conflict with us. They could dump their holdings of our treasury notes, which could collapse our economy. However, if we stop buying Chinese goods we essentially do the same to them. We're basically beholden to each other with the ability to destroy the other's economy but also destroy our own as a repercussion.

_____________________________________
You're not stuck in traffic. You ARE traffic.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [jkca1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I would like to know how the defense "experts" know what China spends. Are these the same experts that didn't see the end of the cold war and saw WMDs in Iraq? China's books are not open so is this best guess technology? How do they arrive at the numbers? Please enlighten.
Reasonable questions. The numbers I provided are their officially reported budget numbers. Some analysts have suggested that China spends as much as $70 billion on military. But you have to judge the motives of the analysts. The number I gave is the one I found most often in official forums.

_____________________________________
You're not stuck in traffic. You ARE traffic.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [armytriguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
veeery interesting. I bow to original sourcing.

My recollections come from books read in teenage years about military aircraft. One of of the little factoids was that it was Carter who initiated the MX missile program and that he effectively killed our participation in detente (not that that was necessarily a bad thing) after Afghanistan....As many whiny olympic athletes will attest.

I'll say it. Your kung-fu is better.

If I find anything different I'll let you guys know....If I even care by then.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [Fatmouse] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's important to note that knowing the location of hidden WMD or knowing if such a secret program exists, or predicting when the pretty nebulous period of the Cold War was going to end, are very different from looking at how much a govt. spent in dollars or yen or whatever currency. That is like the difference between trying to guess whether or not a guy has hidden porn in his house versus looking at how much he spent on his credit card. One is fairly difficult to ascertain, and the other isn't.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [armytriguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We can give nukes to Taiwan. You asked. Short of that there isn't much we can do. Does anyone think we are going to risk a nuclear conflict with China over Taiwan. Does anyone think that China believes we will. Furthermore, China has a very long memory and the patience to match it. They will wait as long as it takes to get Taiwan back and nothing could be more important to them.

One other thing we can do, pray for a democratic China.
Last edited by: tootall: Apr 8, 05 13:51
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [tootall] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"We can give nukes to Taiwan"

You're kidding right? Can anyone say "Cuban missile crisis?"

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Of course I'm kidding. My point is let's not delude ourselves, we can't do squat except continue to let China send their students here and hope that they go back and start a movement toward a democratic China. Let's keep our eye on the ball.... North Korea.
Last edited by: tootall: Apr 8, 05 14:00
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [tootall] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
China will be democratized the same way eastern europe was. We need to get as many satellite TV dishes in there as possible and broadcast Baywatch and Melrose Place reruns 24/7.

There'll be a popular uprising in 12 months tops.

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [armytriguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As a "partial" result of the cozy relationship the previous admisnistration enjoyed with the Chines government they have almost caught up to us in their military capabilities.

Could you clarify that statement (assuming for sake of argument that the second part of your assertion is true)? Are you implying partial as 10% blame, or 99% blame? How is China's current military capability the fault of the Clinton administration more than it is the fault of the current or other previous administrations?

My question to the "Doves" here on ST is what should we do in response to the massive military buildup going on in China.

I know - we should we invoke the GWB doctrine and start a preventative war with them immediately! That's the ticket!


_________
kangaroo -- please do not read or respond to any of my posts
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [armytriguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My second ST compliment, nice. I appreciate it.

All things considered, yes, we are doing a pretty good job. And I guess that might be what it is ultimately important.

HOWEVER (boy was that an obvious however eh?), trying to modernize us and transform us (I consider them separate initiatives, though they overlap) during a war just isn't a good idea. I think it has adversely affected our abilities to equip our men in the best way possible. Those responsible for that are trying their best given the circumstances, but it is not as ideal (in my opinion) as it could be.

Transformation as you say is exceedingly difficult, darn near impossible. So I have to question the decision to do this in a very agressive manner during the war. If the transformation is done at the cost of the most absolute ideal set of equipment for the war, well, that's not good.

As an example, the light armored Stryker has received rave reviews from general and the Pentagon, but has not been nearly as well received by guys in the field. One story I heard about the impetus for the Stryker is that during a demo a general thought it was "cool", and so he pushed it.

And of course resistance is always a common theme to any modernization/transformation effort. Carrying this out during the war, knowing full well there will be resistance just makes me think they didn't plan as well strategically as they should have.

So yeah, all things considered, it's going nearly as well as could be expected. They could have mitigated certain circumstances better, timed certain things better, etc. But all things considered it's good.

Now if crap hits the fan with China, will our transformation/modernization help us? That I don't know.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [Tridiot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agree on the Stryker. It was a weapon system forced on us without a lot of "boots on the ground" input and the reports from soldiers in the field are its not very impressive. Unfortunately the transformatoion/modernization started pre 9/11 so it was already in place. It is going to be a bit of a bumpy ride but I have confidence all will work out.
Quote Reply
Re: Cold War Part Deaux [GJS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Could you clarify that statement (assuming for sake of argument that the second part of your assertion is true)? Are you implying partial as 10% blame, or 99% blame? How is China's current military capability the fault of the Clinton administration more than it is the fault of the current or other previous administrations?"

Listen I already explained this was not about blaming anyone in particular. I am not rehashing the "blame Clinton" mantra. I said the problem began in the Clinton admisistration and it did. With the loss of top classified documents literally walking out of Roswell coupled with the already proven facts that President Clinton was very close to Johnny Chung you can't say he was not at least partially responsible. What %? Hell I don't know it does not matter.

"I know - we should we invoke the GWB doctrine and start a preventative war with them immediately! That's the ticket!"

If thats the best you have to bring to the discussion please stay out. I only asked what you think we should do not throw back some condescending juvenile comment. In particular I am interested in what liberals and Doves think about this.

And just because I know you won't bother researching anything for yourself below is an item detailing some interesting facts and the Clinton administration.


CIA Documents on Ron Brown Declared Secret

Charles R. Smith
Saturday, May 26, 2001

Central Intelligence Agency documents on Ron Brown's involvement with the Chinese army are secret in the interests of "national security," according to an April 30 CIA letter. The Clinton commerce secretary died in 1996 in a plane crash while under investigation for illegal financial ties to Beijing.

In 1999, the Commerce Department was forced by federal court to release documents found inside the Commerce Department on COSTIND, the Chinese Commission for Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense. Sixth District Court Judge Robert Payne ordered Commerce lawyers to release all the COSTIND documents into his custody for review.

Commerce lawyers asserted that COSTIND was a civilian Chinese agency and that the documents did not have to be released. This reporter successfully argued to the court that COSTIND was a well-known unit of the Chinese army.

According to the General Accounting Office, "COSTIND oversees development of China's weapon systems and is responsible for identifying and acquiring telecommunications technology applicable for military use."

A secret Defense Intelligence Agency report revealed that COSTIND coordinates and oversees "defense related developments, production, technology, transfer and marketing."

Another secret report found inside Ron Brown's offices noted that COSTIND "is a military organization, staffed largely by active duty officers" that "supervises virtually all of China's military research, development and production."

In 1994, COSTIND commander Chinese army Gen. Ding Henggao successfully penetrated the U.S. Defense Department and the Clinton White House. During the Clinton years, Ding and COSTIND obtained a vast array of American military technology including an air defense network, supercomputers for nuclear weapons production, satellites and advanced ballistic missile designs.

New Chinese Air Defense Network

In 1994, COSTIND Lt. Gen. Madam Nie Li, Ding's wife, obtained a secure, high-speed, fiber-optic communications system from AT&T. The system was shipped directly to a COSTIND unit, where it was modified for Chinese army use and is now being duplicated for export using American-made parts.

The communications system slipped past U.S. exports laws as a joint U.S.-Chinese commercial venture called "Hua Mei." The Chinese army part of the venture was run by a newly formed company named "Galaxy New Technology."

Stanford professor John Lewis, a close friend and the paid personal consultant for Clinton Secretary of Defense William Perry, was the key board member of the project. Lewis located Adlai Stevenson III, the former Democrat senator from Illinois, to lead the American side of the joint venture.

Ding's wife, Madam Nie Li, headed the joint project as the Chinese co-chairman. In 1994, Lewis contracted AT&T to ship the secure communication system directly to a Chinese army unit using Galaxy New Technology as a front.

According to the Far Eastern Economic Review, Lewis had his friend Perry write a letter on his behalf to U.S. government officials, favoring the fiber-optic export to China.

The documents also show that Lewis worked for Stanford University, the U.S. Defense Department and the Chinese army all at the same time. In August 1994, Lewis and Secretary of Defense Perry traveled to Beijing to meet with COSTIND Gen. Ding. According to the official list of attendees, Lewis accompanied Perry as a paid "personal" consultant - all while serving on the Chinese army joint venture and working as a professor at Stanford University.

AT&T officials who sold most of the equipment and software were adamant that there was no need to check the Chinese firm because the "civilian" Madam Nie Lie led it. The so-called civilian firm was actually packed with Chinese army officers and experts.

The Hua Mei fiber-optic system is now NATO code-named "Tiger Song". In 1998, China sold a duplicate "Tiger Song" secure fiber-optic network to Iraq to serve as an air defense network. U.S. and U.K. jets recently bombed the Iraqi air defense network

Supercomputers for Nuclear Weapons

In 1995, COSTIND Lt. Gen. Huai Guomo obtained Chinese army access to top U.S. atomic bomb labs such as Los Alamos and Sandia National. Huai also obtained U.S. supercomputers for use by COSTIND nuclear weapons labs.

Huai, according to the official Clinton administration dossier, is "a career administrator in China's defense industrial complex."

Huai's credits include joining the Chinese communist party in 1953 and working in the PLA "nuclear industry." Huai reportedly "impressed" his U.S. Defense "counterparts" over the years as a "competent, professional as well as a cordial individual to work with."

COSTIND nuclear weapons engineers working for Huai obtained the computer programs and codes Los Alamos uses to simulate what happens inside an exploding nuclear warhead. The software is exactly what a designer of an advanced weapon would need.

By working directly with Ron Brown, COSTIND Gen. Huai also made it possible for the Chinese military to buy 600 supercomputers on which to run that software. Thus, the Chinese army transformed its weapons development capability from Stone Age to state of the art in a very few years.

In one case, Brown's Commerce Department approved the export of a Sun supercomputer directly to the Yuanwang Group, a company directly under COSTIND control. The Sun supercomputer was then moved to the National Defense Technical Institute in Changsha, part of the Lop Nor nuclear weapons facility, for atomic bomb design.

Advanced Missile Technology

One of the major achievements of COSTIND was the penetration of Hughes and Loral. In May 1994, COSTIND Gen. Shen Rougjun attended several business meetings with Hughes and Loral executives. During this 1994 visit to America, Shen's son, Shen Jun, attended a business lunch with his father and Frank Taormina of Hughes.

In 1994, Hughes executives were scrambling to help COSTIND after the failure of a Long March rocket carrying a Hughes built satellite. Hughes eagerly pinned the failure on the poor Chinese nose cone "shroud" design and not on the Hughes satellite. In the process, COSTIND weapons engineers obtained Hughes proprietary software for missile nose-cone design and analysis derived from years of American ballistic missile tests.

In addition, Hughes V.P. Taormina later assisted Shen Jun in obtaining a job at Hughes. Gen. Shen's son, Shen Jun, joined Hughes to become the top software engineer for all satellites sold to China. Shen inspected all the Hughes satellite control and computer software and can verify that no bugs or viruses have been planted inside satellites sold by Hughes.

Although, Shen Jun was hired at Hughes in August 1994, according to the Cox report, "a division of Space Systems/Loral was also considering hiring Shen for a position that would have allowed him access to classified information."

In August 1994, Lt. Gen. Shen also met and consummated a series of satellite deals with Bernard Schwartz, the CEO of Loral. Then-President Bill Clinton arranged the Beijing meeting.

Between October 1995 and March 1996, as Clinton mulled over whether to ignore the State, Justice and Defense Departments' reasons against granting Loral waivers to export communications satellites to China, Loral CEO Schwartz injected more than $150,000 into the DNC's coffers.

Schwartz had already given $175,000 to the DNC between January and September 1995, at which time the Loral CEO waged a campaign to have Clinton shift satellite export decision responsibility from the State Department to Ron Brown's Commerce Department.

After Clinton's decision to lift the ban in Loral's case and to allow the exportation of the company's satellites, Schwartz handed over an additional $300,000 to the DNC.
Quote Reply

Prev Next