Chinese President Urges Navy to Prepare for War

[waltky]

China makin' Japan nervous, brain-washin' lil' kids...

Chinese military concerns Japan
Wed, Aug 01, 2012 - HIGH STAKES:Japan has warned that it could use military force to defend a group of uninhabited islands that it controls in the East China Sea, but which China also claims

The shifting relationship between China’s one-party government and the military is a “risk management issue” for Japan, while North Korea poses a “significant threat,” Tokyo warned yesterday. In its annual defense report, Japan said the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) had been speaking out on foreign policy more frequently, a key shift in political-military ties that has set alarm bells ringing in Tokyo. “Relations between the [Chinese Communist Party] leadership and the People’s Liberation Army have been getting more complex,” the report said yesterday, calling the shift a “risk management issue.” “The degree of military influence on foreign policy decisions has been changing,” it said.

Senior Chinese military officials have become more vocal, making public comments about US military drills in regional waters, for example, Japanese defense officials said at a briefing. China has been embroiled in separate spats over regional territorial claims — with Japan as well as with several Southeast Asian nations, including Vietnam and the Philippines — which have flared up in recent years. However, the report also said the PLA may have limited influence, with the number of its personnel on key political decisionmaking bodies declining, as China readies for a once-in-a-decade leadership shuffle. “As part of Japan’s risk management, we recognize that the intention and purpose behind China’s actions are becoming less predictable, which is a challenge when we address the country,” said Toshinori Tanaka, director of the defense ministry’s strategic intelligence analysis office.

Japanese Minister of Defense Satoshi Morimoto said that “there is a certain degree of wariness, not only in Japan, but in the whole of East Asia, as to which direction China will be heading.” Tokyo once again in this year’s report described China’s response to disputes with neighbors as “assertive,” a description that raised eyebrows in Beijing when it was published in last year’s report. “China’s [military] moves, together with the lack of transparency in its military affairs and security issues, are a matter of concern,” the report said, adding that Chinese defense spending had grown 30-fold in the past two decades.

The report comes days after Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and Morimoto suggested Tokyo could use force to defend disputed East China Sea islands, known as Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyutai Islands in Taiwan, which also claims the islands. Tensions between China and Japan rose again earlier this month after Chinese vessels twice entered waters near the resource-rich disputed islands, sparking a diplomatic row. Tokyo’s comments about possibly buying the islands from their private Japanese owner generated an angry protest in Beijing. The uninhabited outcrops were the scene of a particularly nasty row in late 2010 when Japan arrested a Chinese trawlerman who had rammed two of its coastguard vessels.

Chinese military concerns Japan - Taipei Times

See also:

Hong Kong parents fight ‘brainwashing’ by Chinese officials
Wed, Aug 01, 2012 - Hong Kong parents are battling plans to introduce lessons praising Chinese Communist Party rule, saying the curriculum amounts to brainwashing and an attack on the territory’s cherished freedoms.

Up to 90,000 people, led by stroller-pushing parents and banner-waving children, took to the streets of the semi-autonomous territory on Sunday to denounce “national education,” as the subject is officially called. The issue has been on the Hong Kong Government’s agenda since it was handed over from Britain to China in 1997, but a new teaching booklet lauding the “China model” of development has infuriated educators and parents. “It will poison our children’s minds,” 34-year-old office clerk Gordon Chan said as he marched with his wife and nine-month-old daughter. “This is putting politics before education.”

Mercury Leung, a 21-year-old university student, said: “Students, especially those in primary schools, are like pieces of white paper. They absorb what is taught in schools. This subject is akin to painting the paper red.” Sunday’s march was the third major demonstration in Hong Kong in the past two months, reflecting growing fears about the extent of Beijing’s economic and political influence in the southern Chinese financial center. Scores of thousands attended an annual vigil on the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown in early June, while on July 1, hundreds of thousands rallied on the 15th anniversary of the handover.

Like many others in Sunday’s protest, Chan and Leung said they did not oppose the teaching of Chinese values in Hong Kong’s schools, but were against the teaching of Chinese Communist Party propaganda. Concerned parents and students have pointed out that the proposed curriculum fails to properly address upheavals in 20th-century Chinese history, such as the Tiananmen protests and the violent radicalism of the Cultural Revolution. The 34-page government-sponsored booklet called “China Model” praises the Chinese Communist Party as “progressive, selfless and united.”

China’s one-party rule is referred to as a “society-first” and “united” system, and is compared favorably to multi-party democracy as practiced in the US, which is described as inefficient and disruptive. A section on multi-party politics comes with the headline: “When the parties struggle, there is disaster for the citizens.” The booklet is one small part of the national education curriculum, which was approved last year and will become compulsory for all primary and secondary students from 2016.

MORE

 

[JoeB131]

China has been pursuing a Mahanian policy of naval development for some time now.

And if we were still in a technological age where iron battleships were the cutting edge of technology, that might be something.

The real threat China poses is economic, because the west's wealthy foolishly tried to make a fast buck exploiting their cheap labor. But since China is reliant on trade, military adventurism would probably put that at risk.

 

[Unkotare]

China has been pursuing a Mahanian policy of naval development for some time now.

And if we were still in a technological age where iron battleships were the cutting edge of technology, that might be something.

The real threat China poses is economic, because the west's wealthy foolishly tried to make a fast buck exploiting their cheap labor. But since China is reliant on trade, military adventurism would probably put that at risk.

That post makes you look even more ignorant and naive than usual.

 

[rightwinger]

China has been pursuing a Mahanian policy of naval development for some time now.

And if we were still in a technological age where iron battleships were the cutting edge of technology, that might be something.

The real threat China poses is economic, because the west's wealthy foolishly tried to make a fast buck exploiting their cheap labor. But since China is reliant on trade, military adventurism would probably put that at risk.

That post makes you look even more ignorant and naive than usual.

What is naive?

America wants to know

 

[Unkotare]

And if we were still in a technological age where iron battleships were the cutting edge of technology, that might be something.

The real threat China poses is economic, because the west's wealthy foolishly tried to make a fast buck exploiting their cheap labor. But since China is reliant on trade, military adventurism would probably put that at risk.

That post makes you look even more ignorant and naive than usual.

What is naive?

America wants to know

Thinking that real, physical naval power is not still the key to the security situation in the South China Seas and East Asia in general, and assuming that a nation won't act on what it sees as its strategic interests due to economic ties.

 

[tjvh]

The Chinese have an old Soviet Aircraft carrier which was intended for VTOL (vertical take off and landing) aircraft which are not front line combat aircraft like the F/A-18, and according to Glaobalsecurity.org they have only four major combatants that exceed 7500 tons, the rest are small patrol type vessels... IMO...The U.S. Navy would likely brush a force like this off in an afternoon.

 

[Unkotare]

China knows its naval power is no where near what ours is. They are devoting a great deal of energy and $$ to addressing that imbalance, taking many of the theories of Mahan as their guide, though adapted to their circumstances. They don't need their navy to be equal to ours to achieve their short and mid-range objectives, they just need it to be an increasingly costly obstacle the closer one moves toward their shores.

 

[rightwinger]

That post makes you look even more ignorant and naive than usual.

What is naive?

America wants to know

Thinking that real, physical naval power is not still the key to the security situation in the South China Seas and East Asia in general, and assuming that a nation won't act on what it sees as its strategic interests due to economic ties.

The Chinese Navy isn't even capable of bridging the 90 miles to Taiwan. China is building a bare bones Navy capable of protecting some of the China coast. They are not an offensive threat.......especially to the most powerful Navy in history

 

[Unkotare]

Ah, the brilliant 'ignore it until it's too late' approach.


And of course China could cross over to Taiwan now. Do you know why they haven't?

 

[rightwinger]

Ah, the brilliant 'ignore it until it's too late' approach.


And of course China could cross over to Taiwan now. Do you know why they haven't?

Because we would kick their asses

 

[LoneLaugher]

Made in USA, Made in America, US, American-Made

 

[Unkotare]

Ah, the brilliant 'ignore it until it's too late' approach.


And of course China could cross over to Taiwan now. Do you know why they haven't?

Because we would kick their asses

Exactly. Because we can. Now.

 

[rightwinger]

Ah, the brilliant 'ignore it until it's too late' approach.


And of course China could cross over to Taiwan now. Do you know why they haven't?

Because we would kick their asses

Exactly. Because we can. Now.

Please...cut me a break

China gets a couple of third rate ships and now you have them challenging the greatest Navy in history.

How about we have them build ONE carrier of the quality of our ELEVEN super carriers and we can talk

 

[Unkotare]

Because we would kick their asses

Exactly. Because we can. Now.

Please...cut me a break

China gets a couple of third rate ships and now you have them challenging the greatest Navy in history.

How about we have them build ONE carrier of the quality of our ELEVEN super carriers and we can talk

Is your first name Neville?

 

[Charles_Main]

US campaign to assert itself as a Pacific powe

To assert ourselves? we have been a Pacific Power since WWII, if anything we are stopping the Trend started by Clinton to give up the Pacific.

 

[Charles_Main]

Exactly. Because we can. Now.

Please...cut me a break

China gets a couple of third rate ships and now you have them challenging the greatest Navy in history.

How about we have them build ONE carrier of the quality of our ELEVEN super carriers and we can talk

Is your first name Neville?

Comparing him to Chamberlain because he rightly pointed out that China's navy is still not a match for the US navy? Hardly the Same as the Appeasing Chamberlain did.

 

[Unkotare]

Please...cut me a break

China gets a couple of third rate ships and now you have them challenging the greatest Navy in history.

How about we have them build ONE carrier of the quality of our ELEVEN super carriers and we can talk

Is your first name Neville?

Comparing him to Chamberlain because he rightly pointed out that China's navy is still not a match for the US navy?

No, because he is advocating ignoring a growing threat.

 

[JoeB131]

That post makes you look even more ignorant and naive than usual.

What is naive?

America wants to know

Thinking that real, physical naval power is not still the key to the security situation in the South China Seas and East Asia in general, and assuming that a nation won't act on what it sees as its strategic interests due to economic ties.

The problem is, if America, Japan and Taiwan stopped investing in and doing business in China because they JUST HAD TO HAVE some crappy little islands in the South China Sea, they'd cause more problems for themselve than it would be worth.

Right now, China has one crappy aircraft carrier they bought from the Russians that is still 30 years behind anything we have.

The thing about Globalism is that everyone has more to lose than gain by a war.

 

[rightwinger]

Exactly. Because we can. Now.

Please...cut me a break

China gets a couple of third rate ships and now you have them challenging the greatest Navy in history.

How about we have them build ONE carrier of the quality of our ELEVEN super carriers and we can talk

Is your first name Neville?

Please......stop embarrassing yourself

China has maybe one quarter of the military strength of the US. One tenth the Naval strength. To compare it to Nazi Germany occupying Europe is silly

 

[Moonglow]

US campaign to assert itself as a Pacific power

Sorry, Mr. Slanteyed butt fucker, but the US is the military power in the Pacific.