China is Stirring: Why Now?

[American Patriot]

So over 10 years. I was talking about it long before that, remember I went in to the military in March of 1976. But it wasn't until 1979 that I "woke up".... I have Jimmy Carter to thank for that. By the time Clinton was in office I was acutely aware of the Chinese and the connections with the White House...

Remember, Nixon opened up that can of worms. Reagan, Bush and Clinton did NOTHING to slow down the bleeding.

Now, granted I loved Reagan and George Herbert Walker was one of my favorites (because I knew him personally and very well) and I couldn't really see there was a problem. Now all these years later after having visited China myself in support of Bush I'm really beginning to realize we were probably playing along with them all the time.

[vector7]

China defense chief cautions U.S. on Asia-Pacific "rebalance"


Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel and Chinese Minister of National Defence General Chang Wanquan. Photo: AFP

Chinese Defense Minister Gen. Chang Wanquan cautioned the United States on Monday that its renewed focus on the Asia-Pacific region has highlighted military deployments at the expense of trade and diplomacy.

The "rebalance" of U.S. military assets to the region has "complicated" the region's security environment, Chang told reporters at the Pentagon, referring to Washington's term for its policy of shifting its focus from the Middle East to the Asia Pacific.

This strategic shift should not "target a specific country," said Chang, speaking through an interpreter at a joint press conference with U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel following their talks at the U.S. Defense Department.

Chang added that if the United States seeks true balance, it must consider "the security concerns of different regional countries."

The "rebalance", which extends beyond military policy to include diplomacy and trade, was revealed by U.S. President Barack Obama's administration in 2011 during a time of strong military and economic growth in China.

Although Washington insists its renewed emphasis on the Asia-Pacific region does not target China, the change has raised anxiety in Beijing, which is in the midst of maritime territorial disputes with U.S. allies such as Japan and the Philippines.

Addressing those disputes, Chang said that countries in the region should not engage in actions that might lead to "trouble or provocation" or "magnify" current tensions.

Any such behavior, Chang said, would be "highly irresponsible and will not lead to a favorable result."

"No one should fantasize that China would barter away our core interests, and no one should underestimate our will and determination in defending our territory, sovereignty, and maritime rights," Chang said.

Asked about U.S. accusations that China has engaged in cyberattacks on the U.S. military, Chang flatly denied the allegations.

"The Chinese military has never supported any form of hacker activities," Chang said.

Chang's comments came in the middle of a U.S. tour that included visits to U.S. military facilities in Hawaii and Colorado.

[vector7]

I think America will be confronted sooner rather than later. Once the US is out of the way many thing will quickly fall into place for both Russia, China and their allies.

The Six Wars to be fought by China in the coming 50 years

Posted on September 16, 2013 by Hip Kee

(This article is the English translation from an article in Wenweipo, a pro-Communist media, published on 8^th July 2013, under the title of 中國未來50年裡必打的六場戰爭, which. From translator’s point of view, despite of its naivety, this article is quite a good portrait of modern Chinese Imperialism):

China is not yet a unified great power. This is a humiliation to the Chinese people, a shame to the children of the Yellow Emperor. For the sake of national unification and dignity, China has to fight six wars in the coming fifty years. Some are regional wars; the others may be total wars. No matter what is the nature, each one of them is inevitable for Chinese unification.



The 1^st War: Unification of Taiwan (Year 2020 to 2025)

Though we are enjoying peace on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, we should not daydream a resolution of peaceful unification from Taiwan administration (no matter it is Chinese Nationalist Party or Democratic Progressive Party). Peaceful unification does not fit their interests while running for elections. Their stance is therefore to keep to status quo (which is favourable to the both parties, each of them can get more bargaining chips) For Taiwan, “independence” is just a mouth talk than a formal declaration, while “unification” is just an issue for negotiation than for real action. The current situation of Taiwan is the source of anxiety to China, since everyone can take the chance to bargain more from China.

China must work out a strategy to unify Taiwan within the next ten years, that is, by 2020. By then, China will have to send an ultimatum to Taiwan, demanding the Taiwanese to choose the resolution of peaceful unification (the most preferred epilogue for the Chinese) or war (an option forced to be so) by 2025. For the purpose of unification, China has to make preparation three to five years earlier. So when the time comes, the Chinese government must act on either option, to give a final answer to the problem.



From the analysis of the current situation, Taiwan is expected to be defiant towards unification, so military action will be the only solution. This war of unification will be the first war under the sense of modern warfare since the establishment of the “New China”. This war will be a test to the development of the People’s Liberation Army in modern warfare. China may win this war easily, or it may turn out to be a difficult one. All depend on the level of intervention of the U.S. and Japan. If the U.S. and Japan play active roles in aiding Taiwan, or even make offensives into Chinese mainland, the war must become a difficult and prolonged total war. On the other hand, if the U.S. and Japan just watch and see, the Chinese army can easily defeat the Taiwanese. In this case, Taiwan can be under control within three months. Even if the U.S. and Japan step in in this stage, the war can be finished within six months.



The 2^nd War: “Reconquest” of Spratly Islands (Year 2025 to 2030)

After unification of Taiwan, China will take a rest for two years. During the period of recovery, China will send the ultimatum to countries surrounding the Islands with the deadline of 2028. The countries having disputes on the sovereignty of Islands can negotiate with China on preserving their shares of investments in these Islands by giving up their territorial claims. If not, once China declares war on them, their investments and economic benefits will be taken over by China.

At this moment, the South East Asian countries are already shivering with Chinese military unification of Taiwan. On one hand, they will be sitting by the negotiation table, yet they are reluctant to give up their interests in the Islands. Therefore, they will be taking the wait-and-see attitude and keep delaying to make final decision. They will not decide whether to make peace or go into war until China takes any firm actions. The map below shows the situation of territorial claims over the Spratly Islands. (Map omitted)

Besides, the U.S. will not just sit and watch China “reconquesting” the Islands. In the 1^st war mentioned above, the U.S. may be too late to join the war, or simply unable to stop China from reunifying Taiwan. This should be enough to teach the U.S. a lesson not to confront too openly with China. Still, the U.S. will aid those South East Asian countries, such as Vietnam and the Philippines, under the table. Among the countries surrounding the South China Sea, only Vietnam and the Philippines dare to challenge China’s domination. Still, they will think twice before going into war with China, unless they fail on the negotiation table, and are sure they can gain military support from the U.S.

The best option for China is to attack Vietnam, since Vietnam is the most powerful country in the region. Beating Vietnam can intimidate the rest. While the war with Vietnam goes on, other countries will not move. If Vietnam loses, others will hand their islands back to China. If the opposite, they will declare war on China.

Of course, China will beat Vietnam and take over all the islands. When Vietnam loses the war and its islands, others countries, intimidated by Chinese military power, yet still with greediness to keep their interests, will negotiate with China, returning the islands and declaring allegiance to China. So China can build the ports and place troops on these islands, extending its influence into the Pacific Ocean.

Up till now, China has made a thorough breakthrough of the First Island Chain and infiltrated the Second one, Chinese aircraft carrier can have free access into the Pacific Ocean, safeguarding its own interests.

The 3^rd War: “Reconquest” of Southern Tibet (Year 2035 to 2040)

China and India share a long border, but the only sparking point of conflicts between the two countries is only the part of Southern Tibet. China has long been the imaginary enemy of India. The military objective of India is to surpass China. India aims to achieve this by self-development and importing advanced military technologies and weapons from the U.S, Russia and Europe, chasing closely to China in its economic and military development.

In India, the official and media attitude is more friendly towards the U.S, Russia and Europe, and is repellent or even hostile against China. This leads to unresolvable conflicts with China. On the other hand, India values itself highly with the aids from the U.S, Russia and Europe, thinking it can beat China in wars. This is also the reason of long lasting land disputes.

Twenty years later, although India will lag behind more compared to China in military power, yet it is still one of the few world powers. If China uses military force to conquer Southern Tibet, it has to bear some losses. In my opinion, the best strategy for China is to incite the disintegration of India. By dividing into several countries, India will have no power to cope with China.

Of course, such plan may fail. But China should at least try its best to incite Assam province and once conquered Sikkim to gain independence, in order to weaken the power of India.

This is the best strategy.

The second best plan is to export advanced weapons to Pakistan, helping Pakistan to conquer Southern Kashmir region in 2035 and to achieve its unification. While India and Pakistan are busy fighting against each other, China should take a Blitz to conquer Southern Tibet, at the time occupied by India.

India will not be able to fight a two front war, and is deemed to lose both. China can retake Southern Tibet easily, while Pakistan can control the whole Kashmir. If this plan cannot be adopted, the worst case is direct military action to take back Southern Tibet.
After the first two wars, China has rested for around ten years, and has become a world power both in terms of military and economy. There will only be the U.S. and Europe (on the condition that it becomes a united country. If not, this will be replaced by Russia. But from my point of view, European integration is quite probable) able to cope with China in the top three list in world power.

After taking back Taiwan and Spratly Islands, China has great leap forward in its military power in army, navy, air force and space warfare. China will be on the leading role in its military power, may be only second to the U.S. Therefore, India will lose this war.



The 4^th War: “Reconquest” of Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands (Year 2040 to 2045)

In the mid-21^st century, China emerges as the real world power, accompanied with the decline of Japan and Russia, stagnant U.S. and India and the rise of Central Europe. That will be the best time for China to take back Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands. The map below is the contrast between ancient and recent Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands (map omitted).
Many people may know that Diaoyu Island is the land of China since the ancient times, but have no idea that the Japanese annexed Ryukyu Island (currently named as Okinawa, with U.S. military base). The society and the government of China is misled by the Japanese while they are discussing on the issues of the East China Sea, such as the “middle-line” set by the Japanese or “Okinawa issue” (Ryukyu Islands in Chinese), by coming to think that Ryukyu Islands are the ancient lands of Japan.

What a shame for such ignorance! From the historical records of Chinese, Ryukyu and other countries (including Japan), Ryukyu has long been the vassal states of China since ancient times, which means the islands are the lands of China. In this case, is the “middle line” set by Japan in the East China Sea justified? Does Japan have anything to do with the East China Sea? (Those who have no idea in these details may refer to “Ryukyu: An indispensable part of China since the ancient times” written by me)

The Japanese has robbed our wealth and resources in the East China Sea and unlawfully occupied Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands for many years, the time will come that they have to pay back. At that time, we can expect that the U.S. will be willing to intervene but has weakened; Europe will keep silent; Russia will sit and watch the fight. The war can end within half of a year with overwhelming victory of China. Japan will have no choice but to return Diaoyu Island and Ryukyu Islands to China. East China Sea becomes the inner lake of China. Who dare to put a finger on it?

The 5^th War: Unification of Outer Mongolia (Year 2045 to 2050)
Though there are advocates for reunification of Outer Mongolia at the moment, is this idea realistic? Those unrealistic guys in China are just fooling themselves and making a mistake in strategic thinking. This is just no good to the great work of unification of Outer Mongolia.
After taking Taiwan, we should base our territorial claims on the constitution and domain of the Republic of China (some people may raise a question here: why should we base our claims on the constitution and domain of the Republic of China? In such case, isn’t the People’s Republic of China being annexed by the Republic of China? This is a total bullshit. I will say: the People’s Republic of China is China; the Republic of China is China too. As a Chinese, I only believe that unification means power. The way which can protect the Chinese best from foreign aggression is the best way to the Chinese people.

We also need to know that the People’s Republic of China recognizes the independence of Outer Mongolia. Using the constitution and domain of the People’s Republic of China to unify Outer Mongolia is naked aggression. We can only have legitimate cause to military action using the constitution and domain of the Republic of China. What’s more, it is the case after Taiwan being taken over by China. So isn’t it meaningless to argue which entity being unified?). China should raise the issue of unification with Outer Mongolia, and to take propaganda campaigns inside Outer Mongolia. China should also pick the groups advocating the unification, aiding them to take over key posts in their government, and to proclaim Outer Mongolia as the core interests of China upon the settlement of Southern Tibet issue by 2040.

If Outer Mongolia can return to China peacefully, it is the best result of course; but if China meets foreign intervention or resistance, China should be prepared to take military action. Taiwan model can be useful in this case: giving an ultimatum with deadline in the Year 2045. Let Outer Mongolia to consider the case for few years. If they refuse the offer, then military action takes off.

In this moment, the previous four wars have been settles. China has the political, military and diplomatic power to unify Outer Mongolia. The weakened U.S. and Russia dare not to get involved except diplomatic protests; Europe will take a vague role; while India, Africa and Central Asian countries will remain silent. China can dominate Outer Mongolia within three years’ time. After the unification, China will place heavy troops on frontier to monitor Russia. China will take ten years to build up elemental and military infrastructure to prepare for the claim of territorial loss from Russia.

The 6^th War: Taking back of lands lost to Russia (Year 2055 to 2060)
The current Sino-Russian relationship seems to be a good one, which is actually a result of no better choice facing the U.S. In reality, the two countries are meticulously monitoring the each other. Russia fears the rise of China threaten its power; while China never forgets the lands lost to Russia. When the chance comes, China will take back the lands lost.

After the victories of the previous five wars by 2050, China will make territorial claims based on the domain of Qing Dynasty (similar way by making use of the domain of the Republic of China to unify Outer Mongolia) and to make propaganda campaigns favoring such claims. Efforts should also be made to disintegrate Russia again.

In the days of “Old China”, Russia has occupied around one hundred and sixty million square kilometre of lands, equivalent to one-sixth of the landmass of current domain of China. Russia is therefore the bitter enemy of China. After the victories of previous five wars, it is the time to make Russians pay their price.

There must be a war with Russia. Though at that time, China has become an advanced power in navy, army, air and space forces, it is nevertheless the first war against a nuclear power. Therefore, China should be well prepared in nuclear weapons, such as the nuclear power to strike Russia from the front stage to the end. When the Chinese army deprives the Russians’ ability to counter strike, they will come to realize that they can no longer match China in the battlefield. They can do nothing but to hand over their occupied lands and to pay a heavy price to their invasions in the past time.

[American Patriot]

Yeah, they have been saying this a long time though. They wanted to be at war with the US by 2015. That year is fast approaching. This next year they will significantly escalate things to the point of no return. We'll be fighting them soon enough. We don't have to wait on some 5-10 year prediction.

[vector7]

Also the Left actively collapsing America as a superpower from within while abanding its allies moves their war time tables up.

[American Patriot]

See, I'm not sure that the Left is directly in contact with Commie Controllers in Russia. However, I DO believe that many of the leaders now sitting in the President's cabinet ARE controlled and/or affiliated in some manner with Russian Communists.

In fact, this whole "I'll have more latitude" crap is indicative of a man who is complicit with an enemy. And he was probably TOLD to say that shit by Jarret or someone else pretty high up the food chain.

The good part of being in the top of the food chain is, eventually you die and feed the little animals below you.

[vector7]

Listened to an interesting podcast earlier this week:

[American Patriot]

China was attacked yesterday by an Islamic fool with a car bomb, right?

Why does communism support these people again?

[Ryan Ruck]

It's their attack dog. Sometimes when you have a dangerous attack dog it can turn around and bite you.

[American Patriot]

Well, I see the Muslims as a lot of rather uneducated, paranoid, fascist religious kooks. Of course there are smart people there. But by the same token they have been fighting one another, and everyone else for CENTURIES.

The Russians spent a lot of time in the Cold War trying to cultivate a relationship with various governments over there, all of whom were loaded with people of the above description. When they went into Afghanistan in 1979 they went there to beat up on people that were trained by China and Pakistan, and given millions (if not billions) in funds by the UK, the US and other "allies".

That was a Cold War proxy war between the USA and USSR. Though in that case the Soviets played a major hand in the war, and didn't push it off on a proxy group. We fed money and weapons to the Mujaheddin and helped them, in general to defeat the Soviets.

Of course, this also turned most Muslims against the Russians at that point. They've spent, in my view, the ensuing years in trying to shore up the relationships they had (Syria comes to mind) before 1979.

The "dog" bites it's owner from time to time, and the owner might have to put that dog down.

At this point, the Russians, the Chinese and even Americans (not the government, but Americans) have come to the conclusion that Islam needs to be stopped and stopped cold before Islam starts placing itself in charge of the world overall.

[vector7]

U.S., China and an unthinkable war

Both have planned for a conflict they hope to avoid

President Barack Obama is seen with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Annenberg Retreat of the Sunnylands estate in Rancho Mirage, Calif. (Evan Vucci / Associated Press / June 8, 2013)

By David C. Gompert and Terrence K. Kelly August 26, 2013

The specter of economic doomsday makes war between China and the United States as unthinkable as fear of nuclear doomsday made Soviet-U.S. war.

Or does it? In fact, Chinese and American military planners are thinking in exquisite detail, as they are expected to do, about how to win such a conflict.

The problem is that the specific plans being concocted could make hostilities less unthinkable, and two great powers with every reason to avoid war could find themselves in one.

Having been impotent against two U.S. aircraft carriers during the Taiwan crisis of 1996, the People's Liberation Army has concluded, as Chinese military writings show, that the best way to avoid another such humiliation is by striking U.S. forces before they strike China. While not seeking war, the Chinese especially dread a long one, in which the full weight of American military strength would surely prevail. So they are crafting plans and fielding capabilities to take out U.S. carriers, air bases, command-and-control networks and satellites early and swiftly.

China now has the economic and technological heft such a plan requires, and it is China's top defense priority. The Chinese military is deploying vast numbers of missiles (including carrier killers), hard-to-find submarines, long-range sensors to track and target U.S. forces, anti-satellite weapons, digital networks to coordinate attacks and cyberwar weapons to crash U.S. networks. When the Department of Defense announced its "Asia pivot" last year, it made it clear that defeating such capabilities is now a major focus of the U.S. military.

Because defending U.S. forces against such capabilities is so hard and expensive, Pentagon strategists have come up with the idea (known as air-sea battle) of crippling such forces — missile launchers, air bases, submarine pens and command-and-control centers — before they can be unleashed. Most of these targets are in China. As with the Chinese war plan, the idea is to strike with speed, fury and little warning.

Such China-U.S. reciprocal planning implies a textbook case of "crisis instability" in which the price for failing to attack before the opponent does is defeat. Each side knows the other is thinking the same way and so has all the more incentive to act preemptively if war seems imminent. Or probable. Or maybe just possible. Given the penalty for attacking second, such spiraling logic can turn confrontation into conflagration.

Still, it would take a spark to ignite conflict. Moreover, generals and admirals do not make the decision to go to war; presidents do. While there is some comfort in thinking that political leaders on both sides would tamp down tensions and not order preemptive attack, it does not take much imagination to see how circuit breakers could fail in the heat of a crisis.

There are several sources of friction that could cause a showdown: Chinese harassment of Japanese vessels in the disputed East China Sea could dictate a U.S. show of force in support of its ally; U.S. naval forces could oppose a Chinese attempt to restrict freedom of the seas in the South China Sea; instability in North Korea could bring both China and the United States to consider intervening; China might contest the presence of U.S. ships or aircraft suspected of snooping off its coast; Taiwan could declare independence. In such situations, an incident or mistake could transform the logic of avoiding conflict into the logic of avoiding defeat.

The People's Liberation Army, once under tight Communist Party control, now has a strong voice in war-and-peace decisions and a propensity to take chances to show that China can't be pushed around — evidenced by its menacing moves in the South and East China seas. If in a crisis China's military leaders advised its political leaders that U.S. forces were getting ready for war and China's only chance to avoid defeat was to strike early — per the approved plan — would Beijing say no? U.S. leaders are steeped in principles and procedures of civilian control, less so their Chinese counterparts.

And if at the same moment the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pacific commander advised the president that the Chinese were gearing up for a preemptive strike unless U.S. forces acted quickly — again, per the plan — would Washington risk the loss of carriers, air bases, personnel and credibility by waiting?

Such events are improbable but not implausible. Although the China-U.S. agenda is jammed with pressing issues, from cyber espionage to currency rates, time must be found to improve procedures and channels to defuse crises and avert military miscalculation, lest the unthinkable becomes unavoidable. And political leaders in each capital should not wait for a crisis before scrutinizing war-fighting plans and insisting on ones that strengthen, not weaken, stability. Given the stakes, plans to win must not be allowed to make war more likely.

David C. Gompert is an adjunct senior fellow at Rand Corp.; he served as President Obama's principal deputy director of national intelligence. Terrence K. Kelly is the director of the Strategy, Doctrine and Resources Program at Rand's Arroyo Center.



They are stirring...

[vector7]

Surface Forces: Chinese Warships Achieve Another First

October 30, 2013:

In September, for the first time in history, Chinese warships passed through the Straits of Magellan (at the southern tip of South America). This has long been the only safe waterway between the Atlantic and Pacific for surface ships. The straits are a narrow coastal path weaving its way through offshore islands. South of that is the open sea and Drake’s Passage, which is an extremely violent patch of water that ships have learned to avoid.


The only other natural route between the Atlantic and Pacific is the Northwest Passage (off the north coast of Canada). But this is blocked by ice most of the time, while the Straits of Magellan are open all the time. That said, these straits have some of the harshest weather on the planet. The straits are close to the Chilean coast and Chile provides pilots (which are mandatory for the 2,000 or so ships taking this route each year) to safely guide ships through. The Chinese task force, on its way to visit Argentina, consisted of a destroyer, frigate, and a supply ship. Most (nearly 90 percent) of ships passing between the Atlantic and Pacific use the Panama Canal.


Earlier in the year (July) 5 Chinese naval vessels (two destroyers, two frigates, and one supply ship) achieved another first by circumnavigating Japan. This was the first time Chinese warships had done this. It happened as the ships were returning from joint naval exercises in Russia. Instead of returning directly to their bases, the Chinese task force plotted a course that took them completely around Japan, the first time Chinese warships have done that. The Japanese were not amused.




Chinese naval ships sail through Strait of Magellan for first time






Strait of Magellan,

October 16

(ChinaMil) -- A taskforce of the Navy of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLAN) which is composed of the guided missile destroyer “Lanzhou”, the guided missile frigate “Liuzhou” and comprehensive supply ship “Poyang Lake” successfully sailed through the Strait of Magellan at 15:00 on October 14, 2013, local time. This is the first time for the PLAN to pass through this important international waterway.

The taskforce entered the western opening of the Strait of Magellan through an inner water channel of Chile on the afternoon of October 13, local time.

“The passage features long narrow section, winding watercourses, many wide-angle turns, strong west wind, huge surges and changeable currents,” said Tang Yinchuan, captain of the “Lanzhou” ship. For safety’s sake, the taskforce strictly implemented the navigating arrangements under conditions of narrow channel, fog and heavy weather, and at last successfully passed through the strait.

Situated at the southern tip of mainland South America, the Strait of Magellan is an important waterway between South Pacific and South Atlantic oceans. In 1520, Portuguese navigator Ferdinand Magellan passed through the place, and hence the name “Strait of Magellan”. The strait is approximately 563 kilometers long and only 3.3 kilometers wide at its narrowest point. With raging waves inside and craggy rocks on both sides, it is one of the waters with the world’s most violent stormy waves.

[Avvakum]

The 6^th War: Taking back of lands lost to Russia (Year 2055 to 2060)
"The current Sino-Russian relationship seems to be a good one, which is actually a result of no better choice facing the U.S. In reality, the two countries are meticulously monitoring the each other. Russia fears the rise of China threaten its power; while China never forgets the lands lost to Russia. When the chance comes, China will take back the lands lost."

"After the victories of the previous five wars by 2050, China will make territorial claims based on the domain of Qing Dynasty (similar way by making use of the domain of the Republic of China to unify Outer Mongolia) and to make propaganda campaigns favoring such claims. Efforts should also be made to disintegrate Russia again."

"In the days of “Old China”, Russia has occupied around one hundred and sixty million square kilometre of lands, equivalent to one-sixth of the landmass of current domain of China. Russia is therefore the bitter enemy of China. After the victories of previous five wars, it is the time to make Russians pay their price."




"There must be a war with Russia. Though at that time, China has become an advanced power in navy, army, air and space forces, it is nevertheless the first war against a nuclear power. Therefore, China should be well prepared in nuclear weapons, such as the nuclear power to strike Russia from the front stage to the end. When the Chinese army deprives the Russians’ ability to counter strike, they will come to realize that they can no longer match China in the battlefield. They can do nothing but to hand over their occupied lands and to pay a heavy price to their invasions in the past time."


Don't think that the Russians don't remember these things either. This is Chinese State-controlled media speaking of wars and foreign relations and therefore is strategic deception to blind Foreigners. Sun Tzu.

"American Patriot' said;

'At this point, the Russians, the Chinese and even Americans (not the government, but Americans) have come to the conclusion that Islam needs to be stopped and stopped cold before Islam starts placing itself in charge of the world overall.'

I'm not sure yet if Communism isn't the greater threat overall than Islam. Some say that that Putin's regime in Russia is appeasing the Moslems and the Chinese to bide time and rebuild Russia as a power, but seems to me, especially with some of the 'forward positioning' i've been reading about here in Cuba, Nicaraugua, and Venezuela, that the final sequence of the Bolshevik 'Weltoktober' is being initiated soon. And, I cannot forget, that Antichrist's Tomb in Red Square.

[vector7]

China Deploys New Bomber with Long-Range Land Attack Missile

Congressional report also reveals China’s armed drone copied from US Reaper UAV

H-6 bomber (AP)
BY: Bill Gertz
November 7, 2013 4:35 pm

China’s military recently deployed an upgraded strategic bomber that will carry the military’s new long-range land attack cruise missile, capable of attacking Hawaii and Guam, according to a draft congressional report.

The Oct. 8 draft of the forthcoming report of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission also reveals that China has developed a new armed drone nearly identical to U.S. military’s Reaper. The Chinese missile-firing drone likely was developed through Chinese cyber espionage against U.S. defense contractors.

The report highlights a rapidly modernizing Chinese military that includes large numbers of new weapons and new warfighting techniques, including attack capabilities in space and cyberspace.

“PLA modernization is on track to alter the security balance in Asia over the next five to 10 years, challenging decades of U.S. military preeminence,” the report concludes.

On the bomber, the People’s Liberation Army in June accepted the first of 15 new Hongzha-6K, or H-6K, bombers. The bomber is based on a late 1950s Soviet design but has an extended range. However, its long-range cruise missile is new.

The report said the H-6K, also known as “Zhan Shen” or God of War, “can carry China’s new long-range land-attack cruise missile (LACM).”
“The bomber/LACM weapon system provides the PLA Air Force with the ability to conduct conventional strikes against regional targets throughout the western Pacific, including U.S. facilities in Guam,” the report said.
Guam is being built up by the U.S. military as a key strategic military hub as part of the new “pivot” strategy of realigning forces toward Asia.
The report said China’s new land-attack missile can be equipped with a nuclear warhead. However, so far there is no confirmation that the new missile is armed with nuclear warheads.

The final commission report will be released Nov. 20 and a commission spokesman said some of the late draft’s elements could be changed. A copy of the draft was obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

China last month disclosed for the first time video of the Changjian-10, or CJ-10, land-attack cruise missile carried by the new bomber. The H-6K carries up to six of the missiles.

The Chinese are also developing a nuclear-capable variant known as the CJ-20 that would be deployed on the H-6K.

Rick Fisher, a Chinese military expert with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said analysts disagree with the commission assessment that the new bomber is likely to be limited to non-nuclear cruise missiles.

“In 2012 Russia’s former Rocket Forces chief of staff retired General Victor Yesin explicitly warned that some of Chinese ground and air launched DH-10 cruise missiles are nuclear armed. China is very likely developing multiple new long-range bombers to succeed the H-6K,” Fisher said. The CJ-10 is based on the DH-10.

Chinese National Defense University military expert Ge Lide stated in a China state television interview Oct. 18 that the CJ-10 is “China’s first sophisticated and cutting-edge precision weapon system capable of long-range precision strikes.”

“It is also a key member of the land-launched and air-launched long-range cruise missile family,” he said.

The missile uses China’s Beidou satellite navigation system for guidance and has a range of up to 1,500 miles.

China can strike targets in all coastal waters within an area known as the “first-island chain,” a string of islands close to China’s eastern and southern coast, with the bomber-cruise missile combination.

The new H-6Ks are believed by military experts to be a stop-gap measure for the Chinese military. The PLA is also building a new long-range bomber with a range of up to 7,500 miles.

The new bomber is said to be in development and will follow production of China’s first domestic air transport aircraft, the Y-20.

China is working to develop its aircraft engine capabilities, currently a major shortcoming of its jet aircraft programs.

A recent Chinese state-controlled press report from Hong Kong stated, “China’s long-range strategic bombers could cover the main strategic support points of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region.”

The publication Kanwa Defense Review reported in August that the new bomber is capable of hitting targets throughout the western and central Pacific, including Hawaii. Other potential targets include Singapore, central India and Russia.

According to Kanwa, the upgraded jet is powered by Russian jet engines that can increase its range up to 5,500 miles.

The H-6K strategic bomber also would bolster China’s extensive missile forces in any future conflict with the United States.

On China’s development of a new armed drone, the commission report said China unveiled in November 2012 at an international arms show its new Wing Loong missile-equipped unmanned aerial vehicle, built by the Aviation Industry Corporation of China.

China is negotiating with five or six nations in Asia and Africa who are interested in purchasing the drone.

The report said the Wing Loong closely resembles the U.S. MQ-9 Reaper, a major attack drone.

The similarities have led analysts to speculate, “Chinese espionage may have contributed to the Wing Loong’s development.”

“Furthermore, U.S. cyber security company FireEye in September 2013 exposed an extensive PLA cyber espionage campaign targeting top aerospace and defense firms for information on U.S. drone technology,” the report said. “FireEye attributed the campaign to a cyber threat group known as ‘Comment Group,’ which U.S. cyber security company Mandiant has linked to the 2nd Bureau of the PLA General Staff Department’s Third Department.”

The reports suggest cyber attacks from China played a role in the design of the new Chinese attack drone.

“China’s military modernization presents significant challenges to U.S. security interests in Asia,” the report said.

[vector7]

23 November 2013 Last updated at 01:28 ET
China establishes 'air-defence zone' over East China Sea
Islands in the East China Sea, called Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyu in Chinese
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

China 'flies first stealth drone'
Japan warns China on islands row
Q&A: China-Japan islands row

China has demarcated an "air-defence identification zone" over an area of the East China Sea, covering islands that are also claimed by Japan.

China's Defence Ministry said aircraft entering the zone must obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".

The zone came into effect from 10:00 local time (02:00GMT) on Saturday.

The islands, known as Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China, are a source of rising tension between the countries.

In its statement, the Defence Ministry said aircraft must report a flight plan, "maintain two-way radio communications", and "respond in a timely and accurate manner" to identification inquiries.

"China's armed forces will adopt defensive emergency measures to respond to aircraft that do not co-operate in the identification or refuse to follow the instructions," said the statement.

A map posted on Twitter by state news agency Xinhua showed the zone covering a wide area of the East China Sea, including regions very close to South Korea and Japan.
Rising tensions

Responding to questions about the zone on an official state website, a defence ministry spokesman, Yang Yujun, said China set up the area "with the aim of safeguarding state sovereignty, territorial land and air security, and maintaining flight order".

"It is not directed against any specific country or target," he said, adding that China "has always respected the freedom of over-flight in accordance with international law".

"Normal flights by international air liners in the East China Sea Air Defence Identification Zone will not be affected in any way."

There has been no response so far from Japan.

The islands have been a source of tension between China and Japan for decades.

In 2012, the Japanese government bought three of the islands from their Japanese owner, sparking mass protests in Chinese cities.

Since then, Chinese ships have repeatedly sailed in and out of what Japan says are its territorial waters.

In September this year, Japan said it would shoot down unmanned aircraft in Japanese airspace after an unmanned Chinese drone flew close to the disputed islands.

China said that any attempt by Japan to shoot down Chinese aircraft would constitute "an act of war".

Last month Japan's defence minister, Itsunori Onodera, said China's behaviour over the disputed East China Sea islands was jeopardising peace.

More on This Story
Related Stories

China 'flies first stealth drone'
22 NOVEMBER 2013, CHINA
Japan warns China on islands row
29 OCTOBER 2013, ASIA
Q&A: China-Japan islands row
29 APRIL 2013, ASIA

Japanese Air-Defense Identification Zone:

http://sun-bin.blogspot.com/2006/05/...ification.html



Area of concern....
http://www.eia.gov/countries/analysi...es/dispute.png



PRC Air Defense Identification Zone in East China Sea....
http://www.china.org.cn/photos/2013-...t_30683715.htm


US military won't change how it operates in the East China Sea after China sets air defense zone, Defense Secretary Hagel says - @Reuters

------

Pentagon slams Chinese move, says won't change how it operates

4:52 p.m. CST, November 23, 2013

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Saturday that the U.S. military would not change how it conducts operations in the East China Sea after what he called a "destabilizing" attempt by China to alter the status quo in the region.

China earlier on Saturday imposed new rules on airspace over islands at the heart of a dispute with U.S. ally Japan in the East China Sea, warning of "defensive emergency measures" against aircraft that do not comply with identification procedures.

"We view this development as a destabilizing attempt to alter the status quo in the region. This unilateral action increases the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculations," Hagel said in a statement.

"This announcement by the People's Republic of China will not in any way change how the United States conducts military operations in the region."


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/s...,3549362.story

[American Patriot]

So they gonna start shooting down Japanese planes???

[vector7]

US airlines advised to comply with China defense zone


As tensions flare over Beijing’s newly declared air defense zone, U.S. airlines are being advised by the U.S. government to comply with China’s demand that it be told of any flights passing through the disputed area.

China announced last week that all aircraft entering the zone over the East China Sea, located between China, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, must notify Chinese authorities beforehand and that it would take unspecified defensive measures against those that don’t comply.

While the United States said it expected its carriers to operate in line with notices issued to airmen by foreign countries, the decision did “not indicate U.S. government acceptance of China’s requirements,” Reuters reported.

Obama administration officials said the decision was made out of an abundance of caution to avoid any possible miscommunications, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Neighboring countries and the U.S. have said that they will not honor the new zone. Chinese defense ministry said fighter jets identified and monitored the two U.S. reconnaissance aircraft and a mix of 10 Japanese early warning, reconnaissance and fighter planes during their flights through the zone early Friday.

Japan’s two major airlines agreed with Japanese government officials to continue flying through the zone without notifying China, Reuters reported.

Vice President Joe Biden is due to arrive in Tokyo Monday on a week long trip to Asia, and has said he would raise the issue directly with Chinese leaders.

The U.S. has tried to stay out of such territorial disputes, but treaty obligations to Japan may force U.S. involvement.

[vector7]

Cold War in the Pacific: China Escalates Tensions with Neighbors


Beijing’s recent establishment of a new air defense zone in the East China Sea is exacerbating long-running disputes with its neighbors Japan and Taiwan — and threatens to draw the US military into a larger regional conflict.


If it were only a matter of distance, the solution to a dispute over a small group of hotly contested islands in the East China Sea would be simple.

Taiwan, which is just 200 kilometers (125 miles) away from the islands, would take the prize. The Chinese mainland is farther off, at 330 kilometers away, and the Japanese island of Okinawa even more distant, at 400 kilometers. Why then shouldn't small Taiwan take control of the five uninhabited islands and three rock outcroppings, known as the Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan?


While Taiwan does lay claim to the islands, so do its more powerful neighbors, China and Japan. And the dispute is, unfortunately, not about distance.

It has to do with influence and natural resources, with hegemony and nationalism, and with bitter historical memories and fresh, global aspirations -- in short, it's a toxic mixture of geopolitics. In fact, a military crisis is brewing in East Asia -- one that is being played out hundreds to thousands of kilometers away from these desolate islands.

A New Air Defense Zone

In Beijing, 1,600 kilometers to the northwest of the islands, the Defense Ministry announced a surprise decision a week ago Saturday to establish an air defense identification zone in the East China Sea. The ministry said all aircraft that fly into the defined area will now be required to declare their intentions and adhere to the orders of Chinese air traffic controllers.

Two days later in Washington, 12,500 kilometers to the east of the disputed islands, US President Barack Obama challenged the Chinese move by sending two unarmed B-52 long-range bombers into the new zone. The aircraft took off from an air force base on the American island of Guam and, a few hours later, penetrated the Chinese surveillance zone without notifying Beijing. B-52s are designed to carry nuclear bombs to their targets. It was a strong signal.

DER SPIEGEL
Graphic: Far East Flash Point

When news of these US flights broke, it boosted confidence in Tokyo (1,800 kilometers away from the islands) and in Seoul (1,400 kilometers away). Since then, Japan and South Korea have also dispatched military aircraft into the Chinese zone. China responded by placing its air force on alert and sending up fighter jets to escort Japanese and American planes. The situation begs an obvious question: What happens if a foreign fighter jet and a Chinese interceptor meet and one of the pilots loses his nerve?

Strategic Obsession

All of the players involved -- except China -- have concluded that Beijing's actions could jeopardize peace in East Asia. All it takes is for someone to make a sudden move. According to the Financial Times, retired Admiral William Fallon, the former commander of US armed forces in the Pacific, called the dispute "absolutely unnecessary," adding that "If you send up fighters, it is another opportunity for people to screw up." His comment was apparently aimed at all the parties involved: the Chinese, the Japanese, the South Koreans and the Americans.

This week, US Vice President Joe Biden is set to visit Beijing. This was initially intended to be a relaxed meeting with President Xi Jinping, whom Biden knows well. But instead Obama's deputy now has to consider some serious questions: Could the Far East actually stumble into a war? What is driving the parties involved in this island dispute, which has been smoldering for decades, and is now threatening to become extremely dangerous? And what can the US do to avert an escalation?

China's motives in this conflict are clear: One year ago, the country surpassed the US as the world's largest trading nation, and 90 percent of Chinese exports are shipped by sea. At the same time, the rapidly growing country has been racing to establish its naval presence, just as the German Empire did over 100 years ago. Yet it bothers Beijing's military leaders that Chinese access to the Pacific is blocked by a chain of islands and peninsulas that are controlled by American allies.

The so-called "first island chain" has become a strategic obsession for the Chinese. China's navy celebrates maneuvers in which its ships sail out into the Pacific -- as the aircraft carrier Liaoning did last week -- as the "breakthrough" of this chain. Right in the middle of this chain, only 600 kilometers from the bustling port of Shanghai, lie the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands.

In the eyes of China's military, logic dictates that the country should gradually expand its airspace to include these islands; they view all objections from competitors as pure envy. "America is applying a double standard," says Chinese Major General Lou Yuan. "The US has surrounded itself with exclusion zones and demands of others that they identify themselves. Yet their aircraft refuse to call in. This is totally overbearing!"

The strategic fixation with the islands has also become a political one that extends beyond the narrow sphere of the military. Many mainstream bloggers in the country also vehemently criticize China's biggest rival, while supporting China's alleged right to self-assertion. "The Americans are like spoiled teenagers," writes blogger Jiangchen-jc, who argues that "they have to challenge others in order to prove their uniqueness."

The timing is most convenient for China's new political leadership. By taking a hardline approach on foreign and defense policy, it can now silence critics who suspected that the government had become too liberal with recent sweeping economic and social reforms.

Demonstrating Chinese Resolve

China's simplest means of demonstrating its resolve in the current nationalistic climate in East Asia is to take a tough stance against Japan. Neither the perpetrators nor the victims have come to terms with the years of occupation -- and the war crimes committed -- by the Japanese on Chinese soil during World War II. It is easy for China's leaders to score political points against the Japanese in a bout of saber-rattling.

Meanwhile, Tokyo is reveling in the US show of strength in the Pacific, taking it as a sign of solidarity. From Japan's perspective, China's efforts to expand its air defense zone have backfired. Beijing's unilateral action instead forced the Americans to more declaratively take sides with the Japanese in the ongoing island dispute.

The Obama administration had generally refrained from getting too deeply involved in the conflict. And even though the White House left little doubt last week that the Senkaku islands fall under the protection of the US-Japanese military alliance, it also stopped short of overtly taking sides with Japan.

Furthermore, thanks to its own flyover, the US Air Force preempted a Japanese reaction, which Beijing might have responded to in a more aggressive manner. Japan, which maintains a strong, highly advanced army, would prove to be a significant opponent for China in the event of an outright military conflict. What's more, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has expressed a desire to water down his country's strictly pacifist constitution.

US 'Pivots' to Asia

In 2011, Obama announced a "pivot" to the Asia-Pacific region, shifting the American approach to China. The move was seen as a way of not only continuing US cooperation with China, but also containing Beijing's power in the region. "As a Pacific nation, the United States will play a larger and long-term role in shaping this region and its future," Obama said.

US reengagement in the Asia-Pacific also referred to America's military presence. General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Obama's chief military adviser says, "The US military will be obliged to overtly confront China as it faced down the Soviet Union." By 2020, the Pentagon intends to station roughly 60 percent of its naval military forces in the Pacific, including six aircraft carriers and numerous destroyers, cruisers and submarines.

In 2011, the US began to expand its military presence in Australia, the first US military buildup in the Pacific since the Vietnam War. In the future, up to four US warships will be allowed to moor in the city-state of Singapore. Since 2011, former wartime opponent Vietnam has allowed the US Navy to use the port of Cam Ranh Bay.

Meanwhile, the Philippines are likely to become America's most important partner in a separate, but similar, conflict over disputed islands in the South China Sea. Some 40 percent of international maritime trade passes through those contested waters.

Washington and Manila have been negotiating since August on stationing more US Marines in the country. Filipino Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin has already announced that the US will in the future inform his country's armed forces if Chinese ships enter territorial waters claimed by Manila. In exchange, US warships will soon be able return to Subic Bay, a Filipino naval station that the US Navy vacated in 1992.

Lessons from Europe?

The growing US military presence is intended to reassure America's closest Asian allies, but China views US encroachment in the region as a threat. When Vice President Biden travels through the region this week, he will have to maintain a delicate balance: He has to reassure US allies, yet at the same time caution them not to overreact. He also has to warn China over its provocative air defense zone, while maintaining an ongoing relationship between the two world powers.

After all, Europeans know all too well how quickly even rational foreign policy actors can find themselves enmeshed in irrational chain reactions in times of crisis. Historians and politicians have been discussing the similarities between China's current situation and the international stage prior to the outbreak of World War I for years. American political scientist Robert Kagan says that Washington has taken on the role of the British Empire in East Asia, and the US must make it clear to Beijing -- "which is the Germany of the time" -- that it "will in fact respond if China behaves in a way that seems unacceptable."

In his bestseller "The Sleepwalkers," which describes how Europe entered the bloody catastrophe of World War I, historian Christopher Clark comments on today's global order: "Since the end of the Cold War, a system of bipolar stability has made way for a more complex and unpredictable array of forces, including declining empires and rising powers -- a state of affairs that invites comparison with the Europe of 1914," he writes.

[vector7]

U.S. sends submarine-hunting jets to E. China Sea post

Chumley-
The Washington Times
Monday, December 2, 2013

• Enlarge Photo
  **FILE** U.S. Navy FA-18 Hornets cram the flight deck of the USS ... more >

Photo Gallery:

• 
  
  9 PhotosTake that, China — check out the U.S. Navy's nuclear submarines

Related Stories

• Joe Biden opens weeklong Asia trip with Tokyo stop

U.S. military authorities dispatched the first of six top-tech submarine-hunting jets to its Okinawa post near the disputed East China Sea, a move sure to ratchet up tensions among China and the United States.

The Navy plans to send in a total of six P-8 Poseidon patrol craft, aimed at bolstering the United States’ ability to root out submarines in the area, Reuters reported. The deployment was planned months ago, but nonetheless comes as China declared an air defense zone above islands that it’s fighting Japan to control.

President Obama, in response to the declaration, flew in two B-52 bombers into the so-called off-limits air space — a strong message that the United States would not abide China’s terms of designation. But Mr. Obama also said that U.S. businesses would obey China’s air zone declaration, and refrain from flying private craft into the zone without Beijing’s permission.

The White House said it is proceeding with previously forged plans to deliver six submarine-hunting jets to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa. The first was sent Sunday, with the remaining five to be delivered before the end of this month, a U.S. Navy official told Reuters.

The P-8 is capable of flying farther than other planes at the base, including the P-3, Reuters reported.

The first of the six jets arrived at the post just one day before Vice President Joseph R. Biden was set to arrive in Tokyo.

[vector7]

Joe Biden tells Chinese to challenge their leaders
Joe Biden tells Chinese to "challenge their government" and "breathe free" before striking more conciliatory tone

By Malcolm Moore, Beijing
11:43AM GMT 04 Dec 2013


Joe Biden waves as he steps off Air Force Two with his granddaughter Finnegan and son Hunter in Beijing Photo: Ng Han Guan-Pool/Getty Images

Joe Biden arrived in Beijing on Wednesday in typically pugnacious form, telling the Chinese to "breath free" and challenge authority.

Greeting a queue of Chinese waiting in line to apply for visas to visit America, the 71-year-old Vice-President told them that "challenging the status quo" is part of the "DNA of every American".

"Innovation can only occur when you can breathe free, challenge the government, challenge your teachers, challenge religious leaders," he said, in implicit criticism of the Chinese system.

In May, Mr Biden upset some Chinese students at the University of Pennsylvania with criticism of China as a country that cannot "think different" or "breathe free".

"You cannot think different in a nation where you cannot breathe free; you cannot think different in a nation where you are not able to challenge orthodoxy, because change only comes from challenging orthodoxy," he said.

Related Articles

• Joe Biden arrives in China for talks
  04 Dec 2013
• Cameron denies 'staying slient' on China human rights
  04 Dec 2013
• China and Japan need emergency hotline to avoid accidental war, US warns
  03 Dec 2013
• China air zone 'increases risk of miscalculation', warns Biden
  03 Dec 2013

By the time Mr Biden began his schedule of meetings with Communist party leaders, however, he had slipped back into familiar, conciliatory rhetoric.

After being welcomed at the Great Hall of the People by Li Yuanchao, his Chinese counterpart, Mr Biden said the US-China relationship is "a hugely consequential relationship that is going to affect the course of the 21st century."

"Like all complex relationships, it calls for sustained, high-level engagement," he said, adding that he believed Xi Jinping, the Chinese president, is committed "to managing our differences candidly and constructively."

Beijing was the second stop in Mr Biden's Asian tour, which saw him begin the week in Tokyo.

Tensions in East Asia have risen once again in the wake of China's announcement of an "air defence identification zone" over a chain of islands that both Beijing and Tokyo claim sovereignty to.

Mr Biden promised Japan that he would raise the issue "in great specificity" with China and has already called for the installation of hotlines to ensure there is no confusion over the zone.

An editorial in the state-run China Daily on Wednesday warned that US support for Japan would undermine Biden's credibility in China.

"Despite trying to present the image of being an impartial mediator, Washington has obviously taken Japan's side," it said.

"He should not expect any substantial headway if he comes simply to repeat his government's previous erroneous and one-sided remarks."