China increases Defense Spending a Whopping 12%

[muman613]

The world needs to keep an eye on China. I believe that China may want to be a world superpower, even dominating America and Europe. I think that the President of the United States need to take this threat seriously. The current Lame-duck president will surely sit on his hands as China eclipses Americas dominance in military technology. Due to lax enforcement of espionage laws the Chinese stole much of American technology during the 80s-90s. It was recently reported that American stealth technology was discovered on recent Chinese armaments.

If America does not invest heavily in military equipment this country will be destroyed within 10-15 years. I think that China views America as weak because our stupid president is weak. This is a great reason to get rid of this poor excuse of a president as soon as possible.

Let us work to make sure that obummer and his wicked administration is shown the door after the next election. Then they can fumigate the white house and rebuild this once great nation..

[TheViper]

Is there a link to this?

[muman613]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/China-hikes-defence-spend-13-to-915-billion/articleshow/7627730.cms

China hikes defence spend 13% to $91.5 billion
Saibal Dasgupta & Rajat Pandit, TNN, Mar 4, 2011, 06.25pm IST

BEIJING/NEW DELHI: China  announced a stunning 12.7% hike in its declared defence budget on Friday, sending shivers down the collective spines of its neighbours, including India, as well as around the globe.

Beijing declared its military allocation for 2011 will be $91.5 billion, which comes just a few days after India pegged its annual defence expenditure at $36 billion.

However, experts hold that China actually spends double the amount it officially declares on its 2.25-million strong People's Liberation Army.

The US, of course, is in a different league altogether. It's annual military budget, which also funds operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, is well beyond $600 billion.

The primary driver behind China's rapid modernisation of its armed forces, which has seen its warships now even being deployed as far as Gulf of Aden and beyond for the first time, is to deter US from interfering in its neighbourhood, especially vis-a-vis Taiwan.

But just like China keeps a hawk-eye on the US, India has to closely monitor China. The Indian defence establishment cannot ignore the fact that China continues to harden its position in the boundary talks, show assertive behaviour all along the 4,057 km Line of Actual Control, expand strategic moves in Indian Ocean Region and help "all-weather friend" Pakistan build its nuclear, missile and conventional military arsenals.

"Pakistan, we can handle...China remains the real long-term threat for us. Beijing, in fact, actively uses Islamabad to bog us down in South Asia," said a top Indian Army officer.

China's 12.7% jump in its defence budget is a return, after a short gap, to its straight yearly double-digit hikes in military spending since the 1990s.

Li Zhaoxing, spokesman of the Chinese parliament, justified the increase by pointing to the levels of military spending by India and US. "It's true that China's defence budget is raised a bit, but the ratio of the defence spending in the country's GDP remains very low, much lower than those of many other countries," he said.
.
.
.

[cjd]

The world needs to keep an eye on China. I believe that China may want to be a world superpower, even dominating America and Europe. I think that the President of the United States need to take this threat seriously. The current Lame-duck president will surely sit on his hands as China eclipses Americas dominance in military technology. Due to lax enforcement of espionage laws the Chinese stole much of American technology during the 80s-90s. It was recently reported that American stealth technology was discovered on recent Chinese armaments.

If America does not invest heavily in military equipment this country will be destroyed within 10-15 years. I think that China views America as weak because our stupid president is weak. This is a great reason to get rid of this poor excuse of a president as soon as possible.

Let us work to make sure that obummer and his wicked administration is shown the door after the next election. Then they can fumigate the white house and rebuild this once great nation..

Very true...However  Bill Clinton also gave the store away to China during the time he was in office...  His administration gave China a great deal of access it never should of had.

[t_h_j]

The world needs to keep an eye on China. I believe that China may want to be a world superpower, even dominating America and Europe. I think that the President of the United States need to take this threat seriously. The current Lame-duck president will surely sit on his hands as China eclipses Americas dominance in military technology. Due to lax enforcement of espionage laws the Chinese stole much of American technology during the 80s-90s. It was recently reported that American stealth technology was discovered on recent Chinese armaments.

If America does not invest heavily in military equipment this country will be destroyed within 10-15 years. I think that China views America as weak because our stupid president is weak. This is a great reason to get rid of this poor excuse of a president as soon as possible.

Let us work to make sure that obummer and his wicked administration is shown the door after the next election. Then they can fumigate the white house and rebuild this once great nation..

before you say the US should invest heavily in military equipment, you should read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federations_by_military_expenditures

[syyuge]

On October 25, Nixon asked President Yahya Khan of Pakistan at the White House to send an oral message to Chinese leaders that the United States had decided to normalize its relations with China and would dispatch a high-ranking official on a secret trip to China. On the next day, in his speech at a banquet in honour of the Romanian guest Ceaucescu, he used for the first time the name of "People's Republic of China." In November, Yahya Khan forwarded Nixon's oral message to Premier Zhou Enlai on his visit to China. Zhou said that this was something very important and he would report it to Chairman Mao Zedong. A few days later, Zhou told the Pakistan president that Mao had agreed to the American proposal on principle, pending the solution of many details: Who would make the trip to China? When? Whether directly country? And so on and so forth.

http://www.china.org.cn/english/features/olympics/100660.htm

So Papistan666 was the original bridge created between the friendship of Red Dragon China with USA. As such this friendship seems to have some epical proportions with theological and materialistic exchanges.

So till Papisstan666 survives, this theological friendship may not convert in to a theological enmity. Rather the newly liberated muslamic nations may take more and more help from Papisstan for building the bridges with the Red Dragon. 

[Zelhar]

America should dismantle or mothball most of the current equipment. The only thing worth spending on is on R&D of new revolutionary weapon systems such as ABL. Hopefully China won't be able to steal these new techs as easily as it had in previous times.

[syyuge]

China,s new J-20 Stealth Fighter:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-J-XX-Prototype.html

[t_h_j]

America should dismantle or mothball most of the current equipment. The only thing worth spending on is on R&D of new revolutionary weapon systems such as ABL. Hopefully China won't be able to steal these new techs as easily as it had in previous times.

why?

[Zelhar]

why?

There is a huge waste of resources and budget in obsolete war machines and excess useless military units. For example, there are way too many surface vessels in the Navy. The really have no use. These ships are very vulnerable to submarine attack in case America goes to war against a nation with a decent Navy. On the other hand they have no use as war machines in low intensity wars like Iraq or Afghanistan.

The Carriers too are a huge waste of resources on a pretty useless and obsolete system. Your money would be better spent on missile subs (SSGNs) and cheaper surface vessels operating UAVs and loaded with cruise missiles.

[Zelhar]

Here is another examle- The Air force operates a flit of B-52 bombers dating from the 1960s. Again an obsolete war machine that cannot penetrate modern AA systems. The only advantage this bomber has its long range. But this is only important for cold war nuclear war games. In a conventional campaign, you can't achieve anything meaningful if you just conduct long range bombing raids on a primitive enemy. You have to close in on the enemy and use your F-15, F-16, UAVs and cruise missiles. All are far superior and cheaper alternatives to the B-52.

[t_h_j]

Here is another examle- The Air force operates a flit of B-52 bombers dating from the 1960s. Again an obsolete war machine that cannot penetrate modern AA systems. The only advantage this bomber has its long range. But this is only important for cold war nuclear war games. In a conventional campaign, you can't achieve anything meaningful if you just conduct long range bombing raids on a primitive enemy. You have to close in on the enemy and use your F-15, F-16, UAVs and cruise missiles. All are far superior and cheaper alternatives to the B-52.

they aren't supposed to penetrate modern AA systems.  They are supposed to launch long range nuclear cruise missiles from many hundreds of miles away form any AA systems.  This is ridiculous.

[t_h_j]

There is a huge waste of resources and budget in obsolete war machines and excess useless military units. For example, there are way too many surface vessels in the Navy. The really have no use. These ships are very vulnerable to submarine attack in case America goes to war against a nation with a decent Navy. On the other hand they have no use as war machines in low intensity wars like Iraq or Afghanistan.

The Carriers too are a huge waste of resources on a pretty useless and obsolete system. Your money would be better spent on missile subs (SSGNs) and cheaper surface vessels operating UAVs and loaded with cruise missiles.

This is completely absurd.  Too many surface vessels?  How else are you supposed to maintain supremacy over the world's oceans?  We have plenty of our own submarines, and the ships also have effective anti submarine weapons.  What country will the US go to war with that has a "decent navy" anyway? 

Carriers are useless?  Are you joking?  How else do you provide close air support to support ground forces in remote places like afghanistan, especially before airbases are captured so the Air Force could come in?  How else do you even support military operations in places outside north america without them??

[cjd]

This is completely absurd.  Too many surface vessels?  How else are you supposed to maintain supremacy over the world's oceans?  We have plenty of our own submarines, and the ships also have effective anti submarine weapons.  What country will the US go to war with that has a "decent navy" anyway? 

Carriers are useless?  Are you joking?  How else do you provide close air support to support ground forces in remote places like afghanistan, especially before airbases are captured so the Air Force could come in?  How else do you even support military operations in places outside north america without them??

The military is planing to use it's B52's past the year 2045... The aircraft really has been refined over the years to do everything it needs to do ... Unless America plans to pursue an isolationist policy they really need to have things like the B52 and aircraft carriers.... During desert storm America used its old battle ships one last time to blast Iraq with one ton shells for quite a few days... After the war was over they interviewed people there... The people shelled claimed the sight of the ship itself and the blast from the old ships large guns was more oppressive then the damage itself... By the same token people who survive a B52 carpet bombing claim its worse then being in an earthquake zone... If the blast itself did not kill the earth under the peoples feet in the bomb run would shift so bad it would actually bury the victims alive as if the were in quicksand... Weapons systems like this are meant to be large and oppressive... They are intended to put some fear into the enemy before the shooting even starts.

[Zelhar]

they aren't supposed to penetrate modern AA systems.  They are supposed to launch long range nuclear cruise missiles from many hundreds of miles away form any AA systems.  This is ridiculous.

But you don't need any longer a flit of aging nuclear bombers. The only missions they have ever been involved in and ever would be is conventional bomb dropping.

[Zelhar]

This is completely absurd.  Too many surface vessels?  How else are you supposed to maintain supremacy over the world's oceans?  We have plenty of our own submarines, and the ships also have effective anti submarine weapons.  What country will the US go to war with that has a "decent navy" anyway? 

The main role of the surface vessels is to protect the over expensive carriers. Scrap the carriers, and you could then scrap much of the surface flit. Most countries with decent navy are nuclear powers and it is unlikely there would be a war against any. If you are looking for a cost effective way to maintain naval supremacy then like I said you don't need a fleet of carriers and manned fighter aircrafts.

Carriers are useless?  Are you joking?  How else do you provide close air support to support ground forces in remote places like afghanistan, especially before airbases are captured so the Air Force could come in?  How else do you even support military operations in places outside north america without them??

You are absurd yourself. Afghanistan is landlocked and to invade it you had to build bases in neighboring countries and invade from land. The carriers contributed very little to the Afghan war and whatever they did, could be replaced by a more cost effective alternative.

In both the Iraq wars, the army air force did most of the bombing not the naval air force. They didn't operate from captured air bases but from existing ones in neighboring countries.

[t_h_j]

The main role of the surface vessels is to protect the over expensive carriers. Scrap the carriers, and you could then scrap much of the surface flit. Most countries with decent navy are nuclear powers and it is unlikely there would be a war against any. If you are looking for a cost effective way to maintain naval supremacy then like I said you don't need a fleet of carriers and manned fighter aircrafts.

You are absurd yourself. Afghanistan is landlocked and to invade it you had to build bases in neighboring countries and invade from land. The carriers contributed very little to the Afghan war and whatever they did, could be replaced by a more cost effective alternative.

In both the Iraq wars, the army air force did most of the bombing not the naval air force. They didn't operate from captured air bases but from existing ones in neighboring countries.

good thing you are not in charge

[Maimonides]

The main role of the surface vessels is to protect the over expensive carriers. Scrap the carriers, and you could then scrap much of the surface flit. Most countries with decent navy are nuclear powers and it is unlikely there would be a war against any. If you are looking for a cost effective way to maintain naval supremacy then like I said you don't need a fleet of carriers and manned fighter aircrafts.

You are absurd yourself. Afghanistan is landlocked and to invade it you had to build bases in neighboring countries and invade from land. The carriers contributed very little to the Afghan war and whatever they did, could be replaced by a more cost effective alternative.

In both the Iraq wars, the army air force did most of the bombing not the naval air force. They didn't operate from captured air bases but from existing ones in neighboring countries.

Army Air Force??? That has not existed since WWII! When it comes to aviation combat the U.S. Army only operates Apache Helicopters, but those cannot carry the firepower necessary to blast away large areas.

When it came to Afghanistan the first bombs came from F-14 and F-18 jets off of AIRCRAFT CARRIERS! At the time the U.S. had no nearby air bases in Uzbekistan or Kyrgyzstan! Furthermore, even if we did have air bases in those countries we would need their PERMISSION to use them.

While there are new anti-ship missiles that are a danger to aircraft carriers the Navy is designing new countermeasures, such as a Laser Guns! http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=laser-downs-uavs Perhaps the day will come when Aircraft carriers and manned planes are irrelevant, but that day isn't here or around the corner.

[Zelhar]

Army Air Force??? That has not existed since WWII! When it comes to aviation combat the U.S. Army only operates Apache Helicopters, but those cannot carry the firepower necessary to blast away large areas.

When it came to Afghanistan the first bombs came from F-14 and F-18 jets off of AIRCRAFT CARRIERS! At the time the U.S. had no nearby air bases in Uzbekistan or Kyrgyzstan! Furthermore, even if we did have air bases in those countries we would need their PERMISSION to use them.

While there are new anti-ship missiles that are a danger to aircraft carriers the Navy is designing new countermeasures, such as a Laser Guns! http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=laser-downs-uavs Perhaps the day will come when Aircraft carriers and manned planes are irrelevant, but that day isn't here or around the corner.

I mean land based Air Force as oppose to the carrier based naval air force. Now lets use Afghanistan as a case study. What exactly did you achieve with the carrier's F-18 and F-14 (which have been retired by now) ? More important what have you achieved that you couldn't otherwise accomplished with cruise missiles and a few long range bombing raids ? Moreover, since Afghanistan is landlocked, you need to ask for permission to fly bombing raids over the skies of Pakistan. You also need the permission of at least one of: Russia, Turkey, China, Iran and Kazakhstan just to fly over their skies on the way to Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.

[angryChineseKahanist]

Don't worry, after usurper sultan obama is done, there would be nothing worth stealing.

And yes, they obviously want to be number one and the only power left on earth is doing nothing.