Thread replies: 16
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
Anonymous
US Aircraft Carrier Begins Patrol in South China Sea 2017-02-20 02:23:06 Post No. 33058361
[Report] Image search: [Google]
US Aircraft Carrier Begins Patrol in South China Sea 2017-02-20 02:23:06 Post No. 33058361
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: CC66BE9F-C353-4CED-94F6-BD27387D99E2_cx5_cy10_cw78_w1023_r1_s[1].jpg (89KB, 1023x575px) Image search:
[Google]
![CC66BE9F-C353-4CED-94F6-BD27387D99E2_cx5_cy10_cw78_w1023_r1_s[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/00bvufn.jpg "CC66BE9F-C353-4CED-94F6-BD27387D99E2 cx5 cy10 cw78 w1023 r1 s[1]")
89KB, 1023x575px
US Aircraft Carrier Begins Patrol in South China Sea
Anonymous
2017-02-20 02:23:06
Post No. 33058361
[Report]
http://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/us-aircraft-carrier-south-china-sea/3729373.html
>A U.S. Navy aircraft carrier strike group has begun "routine operations" in the South China Sea. The operations came despite a warning from China not to interfere with Chinese sovereignty in the area.
>The U.S. Navy announced the operations on Saturday. The strike group includes Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson.
>The Navy Times reported last week on the planned operations with information provided by unnamed Navy officials. The report clearly angered China’s foreign ministry. A foreign ministry spokesman urged U.S. officials “not to take any actions that challenge China's sovereignty and security."
>China claims the man-made islands are part of its territory, along with many other parts of the South China Sea. Satellite images suggest China has added military weapons to some of the islands.
>Other countries with territorial claims in the sea are the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei.
It's time to talk about the elephant in the room, the South China Sea. This is the most likely spot for the next conflict with USA.
-Will USA go it alone against China?
-Who will be the first to shoot?
-What strategy would USA need to counter China in a war?
-Would the Trump presidency be a factor in American (un)willingness to go to war given his unpopularity?
-What will the geopolitical implication in SCS and economic implication for USA if China wins?
>>
The US needs way more super carriers
Bringing like 6 max to fight China is just asking for defeat
The US needs to get rid of their huge active land army which literally does nothing, greatly reduce the airforce, and pump all that money into more surface ships
>>
>>33058378
The US needs more submarines. At the moment, attack subs have the advantage over surface warships, and have higher survivbility than a bunch of destroyers which will likely be sunk in attrition like the ones the bongs lost in the Galklands in spite of their naval superiority.
>>
>>33058378
>pump all that money into more surface ships
yeah, bring back Battleships
>>
>>33058378
>6 carriers
>vs No Carriers
>defeat
o i am laffin PLA shill
>>
>>33058403
We didn't have CIWS in the Falklands and our damage control was pretty bad at the time against state of the art missiles. We also would have sank more argie ships if they hadn't been brought back to port after the Belgrano.
US has Aegis, CIWS, more destroyers, land bases in Japan and Korea, and more numerous and effective aircraft carriers against Chinese missiles.
>>
>>33058422
I don't think you understand what carriers are for or even do
>>
>>33058469
Projecting Naval Airpower, which the Chinese won't be able to do, because they don't have carriers. They also don't have a Japan sitting right off their coast.
>>
>>33058500
Project naval power to where, anon?
Places that already have fucking airfields?
>>
>>33058500
The US will be fighting chinese aircraft launched from land bases..
Not fighting Chinese carriers in the indian sea or something
>>
>>33058422
>6 postage stamps
>fortified island chains near home country
fatnik detected
>>
>>33058468
>our damage control was pretty bad
Don't talk shit, it was very good. The key difference between a ship being lost or saved was whether it was at battle stations or not.
>>
>>33058939
>fixed fortifications
How delusional can you get?
I suppose it's par for the course for a military that still deploys flamethrowers and traditional light tanks.
The PLA has potential, but they're going to learn some painful lessons from their first real combat experience
>>
File: CudTx3iUMAE3bPw.jpg (81KB, 670x670px) Image search:
[Google]
81KB, 670x670px
>>33058361
Why is this news? Isn't there always a carrier underway in the South China Sea?
Anyway, this thread will bring to 50 cent CHICOM shills.
>>
>>33059031
The bong damage control was dismal at best, they brought in Americans to help fix it after the war.
One of the notes that stood out to me the most, was the fact that some bulkheads didn't seal, and a lack of redundancy systems.
Some anon posted about it all a few months back and provided links.
>>
>>33059447
>this isn't news
Nothing is news anymore.
The US had 2 carriers in the SCS at the same time last year and nothing happened.
The Chinese government isn't THAT stupid. They only freak out when you break the 12nm boundary around their rocks and "islands". Even then, nothing serious has happened.
Thread posts: 16
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2