Submit your comments on this article | |
China-Japan-Koreas | |
China Successfully Tests 'Carrier Killer' Missile In The Gobi Desert [REPORT] | |
2013-01-26 | |
An ominous first step.....
| |
Posted by:Uncle Phester |
#13 FYI WAFF > RUSSIA WILL NOT SELL Tu-22M3's TO CHINA. Iff true, just got more difficult for China vee Japan + US Navy, + more likely China will have to resort to using LRBMS + strategic bombers, Subs agz Japan + US??? The more instability in the DPRK, the closer China + PLA will be to Japan + ultimately Taiwan. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2013-01-26 22:22 |
#12 China knows its new CVT is toast once the US formally decided to intervene on behalf of Japan in the ECS - diplomacy + LRBMS aside, the best it can do right now is vie LR PLAAF + PLAN Submarines. The real fight for China will be for the ROK + ultimately TAIWAN. China has times made it clear that ... > it is willing to accept prohibitive casualties in any effort to forcibly militarily conquer Taiwan. > it is willing to risk NUCLEAR WAR agz the US or US-Allied for control of Taiwn or to prevent any dedicated Enemy(s) from using Taiwan in milstrikes agz mainland China. Remember, China desires the Senkakus + Okinawa to guard the approaches to, from TAIWAN, besides also for strategic access into WESTPAC. WIDOUT TAIWAN, IN CHINA'S MIND THERE IS NO "POST-US", FUTURE "WORLD#1", "MANIFEST DESTINY" FOR CHINA. NOT in the 21st century anyway [2050 < 2100]. IFF MSM-NET CRITICS ARE TO BE BELIEVED, CHINA'S GREATEST WEAPON IS NOT MILITARY, NUKE, OR ECON POWER, BUT POLITICAL, I.E. THE PRO-DIPLOMACY/ COMPROMISE POTUS BAMMER + ADMIN. Aka alleged Far Left to Commie, Anarchist-for-anti-US-OWG/Globalism POTUS Bammer. Winning agz China by losing, or vice versy. Iff China refuses to back down vee Japan, the only way the Bammer may avoid a Limited or Full Nuclear war agz China is to either ... > Remain neutral, i.e. NOT militarily intervene on the side of Japan or other, despite the US-Japan Security Treaty. > Force Japan to permamently give up sovereignty over the Senkakus/Daoyus to China. > Besides getting the Senkakus/Daoyus, China may demand regional de-militarization, espec as per USFK + USFJ [Okinawa] + PHIL. > Handover of Taiwan, irregardless iff local Taiwanese want it or not - OR, in the alternate, NO US MIL INTERFERENCE IFF CHINA SENDS THE PLA TO "PEACEFULLY" TAKE CONTROL OF TAIWAN ["Hong Kong" Scenario]??? By the above it is clear that it will likely be the US = US-Allies that will be doing the bulk of unilateral concessions in favor of mainland China, NOT China itself as per anti-NucWar "Price for Peace/World Peace". THE SAME IS IRONICALLY CONSISTENT WID THE BAMMER'S ALLEGED "ANARCHIST" AGENDA, FAR/ULTRA-LEFTIES = COMMIES, AS WELL AS THAT OF "ANTI-US GLOBALISTS". Pray hard + keep your fingers crossed this 2013. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2013-01-26 21:59 |
#11 Carrier of what, AIDS? The clap? Typhoid Mary? |
Posted by: Cheaderhead 2013-01-26 21:16 |
#10 The intent is there. They have to start somewhere. Humble beginnings. Insufferable if they are encouraged by success .... |
Posted by: gorb 2013-01-26 17:51 |
#9 There is no carrier. |
Posted by: Shipman 2013-01-26 16:27 |
#8 Perhaps they are betting on a set of Rules Of Engagement which will prevent the Carrier from moving out of the way - without prior approval from the lawyer types and ACLU back in Washington D.C. Entirely possible. |
Posted by: CrazyFool 2013-01-26 15:32 |
#7 "We aimed at the desert and, by gum, we hit it! That's a success in my book" - the Chinese |
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2013-01-26 15:20 |
#6 I think they would have been better off paving a big chunk of the desert, driving a remotely controlled truck loaded with sensors back and forth to mimic the movements of a carrier, while having several observation aircraft taking video of the area and recording the distance between missile impact and the location of the truck/carrier. Sounds like an extremely preliminary test. |
Posted by: Zhang Fei 2013-01-26 14:11 |
#5 I don't see the big deal. They hit a stationary target. How is that different from every other ballistic missile test? The problem for ballistic missiles is being able to hit moving targets. That's hard to do with a non-nuclear warhead. |
Posted by: Zhang Fei 2013-01-26 13:56 |
#4 You sir, on on a roll. |
Posted by: Shipman 2013-01-26 12:15 |
#3 "You sank my bactrian!" |
Posted by: swksvolFF 2013-01-26 11:30 |
#2 Of course we have one too! U.S.S. Desert Ship at White Sands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Desert_Ship_(LLS-1) |
Posted by: George Glaigum7976 2013-01-26 07:54 |
#1 Nice flat area to test it. However, as the article states tracking this over water vs desert is entirely different game, and the Chinese still don't have a very good system for doing it. |
Posted by: DarthVader 2013-01-26 00:35 |