US plans new missile defence shield in Asia

Dear ATS Readers, Writers,

Did a search with the published title..hope this is not a repeat for ATS readers.

The United States is planning to build a new missile defence shield in Asia to contain threats from North Korea and counter China's growing missile capabilities.

The news came after an unnamed US official told Jane's Defence Weekly that China's People's Liberation Army tested an intercontinental ballistic missile on July 24 which has the range to strike any city in the United States.

LINK: TELEGRAPH UK

Something tells me things won't be so friendly with China quite soon... they'll be burning up their supply of Chinese made USA flags...

Of course China is going to see this "new missile shield" as a threat... and I suppose the "WEST" figures it will be able to shoot them all down, (the NOOKLER BOMBS..as Bush woulda said.)??

It MAY come to flinging missiles at each other...someday far in the future I hope, preferrably never..but this South China Sea thing is getting a bit weighty.. China has had demonstrations all over about the Japanese "invading" their island..sigh.. Things are getting hotter.

Ought to see some pretty verbose replies coming from China soon on this I presume??

Certainly steps things up a knotch or two in that "theatre".

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by pravdaseeker


Actually it's pronounced noo clear which is close to how you spelled it. Bush always said noo cue ler haha.. Sad after making fun of it so long it has bled into popular culture. Heard george noory say nu cu ler the other night..

It's much easier to shoot down a missile as it is in it's early stages, and if you wait till it's coming back down it may have already split into many warheads by then.

This is a threat to China Russia and North Korea.. They're the new axis of evil right? I mean after Iran is gone.

Russia and China look at this and say "oh Look my sub is right on your shore line.. Just try and shoot one of those missiles down fools.." China even showed us that one near california.. And do we have missile defence in canada?

I don't like this game the world is playing.. It's a not so cold war, maybe a "warm war" between at least 5 nations... Makes me VERY nervous.

This has to be the most foolish move ever, are they going to build a missile shield on the north pole as well???? if not, then this is useless.


This will only increase hostilities, also, china has very advanced missile capabilities:

The DF-21D (Dong-Feng 21 variant D) is the world's first and only anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM). It's a two stage, land-launched missile with a maximum estimated range of 2,700 to 3,000 km. Its single fuel-air explosive warhead packs 200 to 500 kilotons. It was developed by China Changfeng Mechanics and Electronics Technology Academy as part of the country's massive military modernization effort, an initiative focused primarily on developing overwhelming missile technologies for which there are no effective defenses. The Defense Department believes it entered active service around 2009.

Source


And Russia is well underway to develop missiles that can "Out maneuver " any missile shield built in Europe.

f it works, the missile — called the BrahMos 2 — is expected to travel up to Mach 7 from sea-, land- and air-launched platforms. And it’s supposed to be ready for flight tests in 2017, which is overly optimistic, at best. “I think we will need about 5 years to develop the first fully functional prototype,” Sivathanu Pillai, CEO of India-based BraHmos Aerospace said in Moscow on Wednesday. Pillai also suggested the missile already exists, and that BrahMos has conducted ”lab tests [of the missile] at the speed of 6.5 Mach.”

Source


These supposed missile shields are the stupidest idea of the century, once its completed it will be out dated in less than a year.

Namaste.

reply to post by Dustytoad


Dear Dustytoad, ATS Readers, Writers,

First of all, thank you for the PROPER Bushism..LMAO!! Crazy eh..

Agreed, Getting warmer isn't it? And it really sucks don't it? 12 years on, almost... do YOU FEEL SAFER?
Just as free? NO? Just lovely.

Yep, there was news story about A Russian Akula sub off the coast of Louisiana.. for 2 weeks unknown..

TO ME, that was a sign of ..Russia being able to deal a massive guided missile attack on the entire oil refinery infrastructure..you see, the USA Achilles heel IMHO, is the refineries ONLY in this tight region. It would bring us to a halt..

Yeah.. things are beyond "cold war", must agree.

Pravdaseeker

You see, here is what I fail to understand about U.S.-China relations and the general economic/political/military inconsistency. On the one hand, we have current President Obama (and I'm sure several other president before him) using their well-honed rhetorical skills (see "sophistry") to convince U.S. citizens that powerful national actors (Russia, EU, an in this particular case, China) can develop breathtakingly resource-hungry, modern societies, that absolutely depend upon a globe with limited resources (see oil, gas, rare metals, processed food, etc...). And they say these things to the public, while claiming that the nations are not in a "zero-sum" game to divvy up the global resource pie. With a straight face, mind you.

But actions speak louder than rhetoric. Quoting the elegant musicians The Doobie Brothers in their song "Taking it to the Street": 'I ain't blind and I don't like what I think I see'. And what I see has been a blatantly obvious strategic shift on the part of the U.S. military establishment and the Chinese military establishment to re-direct their national resources to a possible--if not expected-- future engagement. Chinese investment in submarines, a carrier, satellite "busting" missiles, stealth jets and the U.S. sudden interest int he Sea of China and all things Southeast Asian has thrown up so many red flags that it's almost embarrassing how transparent both governments have been about their future intents. And now another piece of evidence comes out to confirm my suspicions.

Neither the governments of the U.S. or the Chinese give a damn about their citizenry. They have made their elites (in whatever chosen political form) and have picked their winners and losers (usually Joe or Mei public). The gears of the Chimerica military industrial complex are in play. Their (and our) commerce and industry have been designed for war--centered on it, really. Boeing, Haliburtan, LockHead-Martin, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, The Bank of China, Huawei, China Construction Bank, Chinese Military Industrial Complex and their proxies/subsidiaries work like a monstrous, yet oddly coordinated invisible hand...all holding the drum-beaters of war. Driving the rhythm that they hope will lead the citizenry to our death and their finance.

-The Ghoster

reply to post by WiseThinker


Dear Wisethinker, ATS Readers, Writers,

YUP.... it certainly doesn't build "trust"... does it?

As far as the NORTH SHIELD mentioned, it "sorta" exists...

On Kodiak Island, there is a large military anti- missile facility. Much of this island is a blur on Google earth the last time I looked. So I figured it was to not disclose where this shield system is at on this pretty large island.

When I was a youth they put in the Early warning system way up near the Arctic Circle..Dont know if they modernized it with any anti-missile technology..

And I think you are quite correct when you said after spending zillions of dollars, "they" will come up with something that will make them ineffective.and the deadly missiles will get through to hit their targets!

Yep, China has definately got their missile science down good.. and these zig zagging incoming anti-ship missiles will someday generate a sad headline..and perhaps the excuse for war so many have insanely sought.

The current in service missiles that have some wiggling programs in them, already are making those fancy falanx guns on ships miss a few... they overwhelm the gun, it is constantly trying to align before firing, then it moves, and gun realigns, meanwhile the missile gets through and scores a hit..

2 out of 5 is what I remember reading that might get through.. Pretty much could bet one out of 5 would get through. Especially if it was a 10 missile onslaught. All it takes is ONE of some of these new anti-ship missiles to sink it with 3 to 5 thousand sailors , or damage it so bad it has to go into drydock for months. Thinking a aircraft carrier here.

Once again I see this as only a step closer to some terrible outpouring of destruction someday. Our world leaders are leading us down a perilous path.

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by theghoster


Dear Ghoster, ATS Readers, Writers,

Right on, and well said Ghoster...

Yes it is pretty much in your face isn't it??

I remember Bill Clinton saying how he thought it was a good idea for China to acquire the wests weapons..as it
made the sides more even in any future conflict, thus making it LESS LIKELY to happen. Hmmmm, I dont think it is going to work that way with Russia and China.

When you consider how many "elites" are begging someone to wipe a huge portion of us useless eaters off the planet..make fertilizer from the bones... something.

Its always about resources.. from way back in B.C. E. times, it was about resources.. of value to the invaders.

Same today just using fancier "swords" that can strike down thousands with one "blow".

Been working all night, gotta crash, check up with thread later.. thanks for your input.

Pravdaseeker

What the japanese said, is way out of stuff here ... they're trying to goat the Chinese into using force. They openly offended the Chinese people over the autrocities in WWII.

reply to post by theghoster


I think you are entirely wrong here.

First of all, China is not showing any interrest in building an attacking force. Mind you, that this is a tactical error of China, but none the less this is what they're doing. They are preparing themselves for a conflict, with the US, over the oceans of Asia. The US has presence in Asia, and is "dominating" it as an occupier ... that is precisely what the US is doing, it has taken over the occupation of Asia, from the british and french. This is the concern ... while the US is developing stealth technology to be able to "creep" upto Chinese coastlines, and western oil companies are drilling on the chinese coastlines, China has only bought one aircraft carrier from Russia. A used one ... if China wanted to establish such force, it would obviously build one itself ... but instead, it has bought one ready made, for the purpose of studying it's capabilities.

Scenario, the chinese are preparing for the ability to strike and erase, the US fleet presence, if necessary. They are not creating a force, to attack the west ... they "may" have intentions of "kicking" the US out of Asia.

And I'll tell you this sincerely ... I really hope they grow the balls to kick the US out of Asia, sooner than later. As oil resources prove lesser, and oil prices go up ... the oil off the Chinese coast line, will be even more attractive, with devestating resaults. for China, it must maintain it's sovereignty over western nations, sooner than later. Making the mistake, the japs made, in trying to destroy the US fleet and dominate Asia, is a tactical error.

But, China's history has always been that of a country who has suffered defeat ... and it's always used its population, to "outgrow" it's occupiers. It's probable, that they will adopt this policy, rather than any other policy even now ... their war machine, is primarily targetted at Taiwan, where they want to end the Nationalists, as a future threat.

The problem with the Chinese, is they are not thinking like Americans, or Europeans.

I think you are entirely wrong here.

First of all, China is not showing any interest in building an attacking force.

Good point. It has been pretty defensive, I'll admit. My suggestion that it has been offensive in my previous post was inaccurate. I retract it.

Mind you, that this is a tactical error of China, but none the less this is what they're doing. They are preparing themselves for a conflict, with the US, over the oceans of Asia. The US has presence in Asia, and is "dominating" it as an occupier ... that is precisely what the US is doing, it has taken over the occupation of Asia, from the british and french. This is the concern ... while the US is developing stealth technology to be able to "creep" upto Chinese coastlines, and western oil companies are drilling on the chinese coastlines, China has only bought one aircraft carrier from Russia. A used one ... if China wanted to establish such force, it would obviously build one itself ... but instead, it has bought one ready made, for the purpose of studying it's capabilities.

Agreed

Scenario, the chinese are preparing for the ability to strike and erase, the US fleet presence, if necessary. They are not creating a force, to attack the west ... they "may" have intentions of "kicking" the US out of Asia.

Agreed

And I'll tell you this sincerely ... I really hope they grow the balls to kick the US out of Asia, sooner than later. As oil resources prove lesser, and oil prices go up ... the oil off the Chinese coast line, will be even more attractive, with devestating resaults. for China, it must maintain it's sovereignty over western nations, sooner than later. Making the mistake, the japs made, in trying to destroy the US fleet and dominate Asia, is a tactical error.

But, China's history has always been that of a country who has suffered defeat ... and it's always used its population, to "outgrow" it's occupiers. It's probable, that they will adopt this policy, rather than any other policy even now ... their war machine, is primarily targetted at Taiwan, where they want to end the Nationalists, as a future threat.

Agreed

The problem with the Chinese, is they are not thinking like Americans, or Europeans.

And agreed. We don't really disagree. I guess my biggest point was really that neither governments seem particularly concerned about the well being of their citizens and their mutual building up industries (whether defensively (China) or offensively (U.S.)) strikes me of blatant cynicims and disregard for human life. It tells me that the global elite are not necessarily cohesive...but seem to be on the same page about making their citizens expendable at almost any cost. That unnerves me.

reply to post by WiseThinker


The Missile Defense System is a platform, not a specific weapon or ammo. It can't be outdated because the only thing you need to do - in order to make it effective against newer missiles - is to update the mechanisms it uses to take down missiles.

If the new missile is faster, then put a new anti-missile system that can keep up with it.

What you are saying is almost like saying that we should throw all rifles and guns to the garbage just because a new ammo round was invented.

There is always a weapons race, and there is always something new and better. That doesn't mean something will become obsolete just because a new toy appears.

Tell me, did the U.S. throw the carrier groups to the recycling bin when the new anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles appeared?

No. They updated the defensive systems. To a point where it's almost impossible to reach a modern U.S. aircraft carrier and still conserve your "whole and in one piece" status.

Any particular WAG as per which country will allow the defense sheild? I know the link indicated 'South East Asia'.

reply to post by bjarneorn

First of all, China is not showing any interrest in building an attacking force.

That's totally incorrect.

You are mixing orders with intent and military growth. How you use your military force is what characterizes it as being offensive or defensive, and defensive usually means smaller numbers, not bigger.

For instance, both Germany and Japan were allowed to have a defensive military force. But, since they were defensive, their numbers were almost 1/10 of what they had previously. The size of your force is what defines what you can do with it, even if you choose not to use it.

As we speak, China is increasing it's military in both size and sophistication.

Most people assume China didn't have a big enough military force to be defensive, but they actually did. They had more than enough troops and vehicles to secure all their territory. The only problem with them is what is called "projection", the ability to reach other countries with your military force.

That's the only reason why Chinese military is(or was) regarded as defensive. It didn't have any projection capability outside their regional waters/airspace.

That is changing.
Japan flags Chinese army's growing role as risk issue.(Reuters)

Japan on Tuesday flagged the Chinese army's growing role in shaping the country's foreign policy as a security risk, saying a sense of caution exists across East Asia about Beijing's apparent military expansion in the region.

China boosts defense budget 11 percent after U.S. "pivot" (Reuters)

China will boost military spending by 11.2 percent this year, the government said on Sunday, unveiling Beijing's first defense budget since President Barack Obama launched a policy "pivot" to reinforce U.S. influence across the Asia-Pacific.

The increase announced by parliament spokesman Li Zhaoxing will bring official outlays on the People's Liberation Army (PLA) to 670.3 billion yuan ($110 billion) for 2012, after a 12.7 percent increase last year and a near-unbroken string of double-digit rises across two decades.

Although it's still very far from what the U.S. spends, it's a serious demonstration that China is going for it. You don't need to spend billions upon billions, and increase spending further, just to keep defensive. Especially considering the force they already had.

You increase spending when you want more, and more means offensive.

Want an example of that? Which country has been waging more offensive wars in the past decade or two (morality and effectiveness of the wars is not being addressed)? The U.S....

Which is the country with the biggest increase in military spending in recent years? The U.S....

It's one of those things of "1+1=2".

China has only bought one aircraft carrier from Russia. A used one ... if China wanted to establish such force, it would obviously build one itself ... but instead, it has bought one ready made, for the purpose of studying it's capabilities.

You are not talking about buying a car...

An aircraft carrier is provably one of the most advanced and complex pieces of engineering that we've ever built. You can't just wake up and say "I want an aircraft carrier today". The Russians and the Americans spent decades perfecting them, and unless you want to be wiped out in a battle, you need to keep up with modern warships.

Buying a used - but still modern - carrier means that they just gained access to a perfect example of "how to build and aircraft carrier". Without spending billions, mind you. Russians are experts in making complex vehicles with a price-stamp of rain...

They can study and analyze structural weak and strong points, stress points where it can fracture, and so on. The Chinese are known to pick up something other countries/companies developed, and building them with half the cost and twice the number.

They didn't buy the carrier to use it, they bought it so they could learn enough to make their own. Exactly the same thing they are doing with aircrafts and other vehicles.

And aircraft carriers aren't defensive. They are an offensive force. For defense you just need airfields around your country...

reply to post by hp1229


Provably the Philippines.

They have been permissive and cooperative with the U.S. Navy/Airforce, and they have a common ground in relation to possible threats coming from China/North Korea.

They tried to keep piece with several agreements, but they still have disputed islands with both China and Vietnam.

Most of them aren't habited. It's mainly a resource battle.

Originally posted by theghoster
And agreed. We don't really disagree. I guess my biggest point was really that neither governments seem particularly concerned about the well being of their citizens and their mutual building up industries (whether defensively (China) or offensively (U.S.)) strikes me of blatant cynicims and disregard for human life. It tells me that the global elite are not necessarily cohesive...but seem to be on the same page about making their citizens expendable at almost any cost. That unnerves me.

Unnerves me as well ... I have an ache in my stomache, every day. I'll probably grow an alser ...

But one thing, I must say that keeps up my spirit. When watching "China's got Talent" (yeah, they've got one of these too). They appear, to advocate for empathy rather than "eliteness". And their broadcasts appear to be emphasizing human empathy, rather than eliteness ... not just in "China's got talent", but also in their movies, TV series, etc.

The only "elitism", I've seen ... comes from the old school system, and the over-protected one-child-policy children. I think this is China's biggest concern, where they'd be better off striving for higher quality life standard, and that population automatically retracts with it, instead.

Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
reply to post by hp1229

 

Provably the Philippines.

It would make sense to spread it across Japan and Phillipines.

Dear ATS Readers, Writers..

Wonderful responses folks, and no troll like replies, all civil!! WOW COOL!!! LOVE IT!!!

Agreed with some of the responses as far as locations to put these in at..the Republic of the Philippines, and one mentioned Viet Nam.. interesting. I DO remember not long ago..Viet Nam requesting the USA to reopen Kam Rahn Navy base..as a "presense" to counter China's South Sea claims, etc..so Viet Nam is a good guess as well.

It bothers me to see this escalation.

The GarrasVan NOrmandy post was more correct in probabilities..Chinas definate shift; and PAST RHETORIC, especially involving the Chinese anti-ship missiles. "Sunburn" I think they are called.. and past bellucose remarks on these missiles and US aircraft carriers was a bit unnerving.

Many say that there is not a fleet to land troops etc, well I must point out..that there IS A FLEET just waiting for the taking.

click here please

The image at the link is of ONLY ONE anchorage of ships scattered throughout the region..albeit Singapore seems to be the mother of all idle fleets..lol.

Their numbers are equivalent to the entire British and American navies combined; their tonnage is far greater," writes reporter Simon Parry. "Container ships, bulk carriers, oil tankers - all should be steaming fully laden between China, Britain, Europe and the US, stocking camera shops, PC Worlds and Argos depots ahead of the retail pandemonium of 2009."

LARGER THAN US AND BRITISH NAVIES COMBINED???... hmmm, interesting, just waiting to be commandeered and put into use maybe?

The fleet is out there,. all they need to do is TAKE IT! Invasion fleet in mothballs waiting for them..

It s a curveball thought but VERY Sun Tzu-ish eh???

I also think the Chinese build up is to take over Taiwan as well, and the ability to do it, get it over with; whilst not allowing the "west" to intervene in time to change the outcome.

Interesting times indeed... and I feel my future homeland will be stuck in the middle, OZ... of the big bully gangs slugging it out in the future.. sigh.

Hang in there the ride is getting a bit rough.

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by pravdaseeker
I'm not too sure but if I'm not mistaken, Vietnam has strategic ties and help from India. Not that they might accept US offer if its beneficial from a national interest/cost point of view.
LINK

The relationships between the two countries make a lot of sense when they share common interest- maritime security, fighting terrorism, security of the sea lanes of communications, piracy and natural disasters. Ever since India and Vietnam signed the New Strategic Partnership in 2007, there witnessed significant improvement in a multifaceted ties ranging from political and economic engagements, security and defence cooperation, science and technology and close cultural contacts. Despite Chinese objections, India and Vietnam went a step ahead to signing six agreements encompassing promote oil exploration in South China Sea, extradition treaty, deepen trade, security and strategic ties, etc.

Needless to say that yes they're all aware of the growing chinese influence in the region and the mentality of 'acquisition' of naval and offshore territories by the chinese Sometimes I wonder if indeed the control or surrounding of ME (Especially Iran) is nothing more than a securing of one of the key resources that China relies upon? And during the extreme scenario (war), the outcome can be easily controlled against them? Just a WAG.