If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Wise wrote:
In article , Pooh Bear wrote: The Cold War is over - or did someone forget to mention it to you ? Somebody needs to tell that to the USN VQ-1 EP-3 crew who were held prisoner by the Chinese military several days before being allowed to even speak with the outside world. Compare that to Gary Powers' treatment if you want to make a Cold War comparison. If the USA chooses to spy on the PRC, I'm unsurprised that the PRC wishes to try and deter such action. I would be interested to see the reaction of the USA to Chinese spy planes off its shores ! Graham |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote: If the USA chooses to spy on the PRC, I'm unsurprised that the PRC wishes to try and deter such action. Ramming aircraft in international airspace seems, well, clumsy of them. I would be interested to see the reaction of the USA to Chinese spy planes off its shores ! They use "fishing" boats, instead. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote: The Cold War is over - or did someone forget to mention it to you ? Somebody needs to tell that to the USN VQ-1 EP-3 crew who were held prisoner by the Chinese military several days before being allowed to even speak with the outside world. Compare that to Gary Powers' treatment if you want to make a Cold War comparison. If the USA chooses to spy on the PRC, I'm unsurprised that the PRC wishes to try and deter such action. I would be interested to see the reaction of the USA to Chinese spy planes off its shores ! The number of Chinese apologists spouting this BS sickening. Chinese ELINT aircraft have plaid spook on the Koreans and Japanese for years. They are intercepted by those countries' assets as well as those of our USAF and USN. Would Japan be justified to recklessly intercept their PRC spy planes in international airspace and then take the crew prisoner when they are forced to land as a consequence of an incompetently flown intercept? --Mike |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Steve Hix wrote:
In article , Pooh Bear wrote: If the USA chooses to spy on the PRC, I'm unsurprised that the PRC wishes to try and deter such action. Ramming aircraft in international airspace seems, well, clumsy of them. From what I heard it wasn't actually 'ramming'. Foolish airborne jousting perhaps ? I would be interested to see the reaction of the USA to Chinese spy planes off its shores ! They use "fishing" boats, instead. In international waters no doubt ? Somewhat less effective though. Don't ever forget that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander too. Graham |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Pooh Bear wrote in
: Jim Yanik wrote: Pooh Bear wrote in : "Thomas J. Paladino Jr." wrote: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ina/tu-22m.htm Two part question; first, do you think that China will actually succeed in it's acquisition attempts regarding the Backfire, and if so, how many would they end up with? Irrelevant Second, what does this mean to the the US? Bugger all ! China needs the USA ( and the rest of the western world ) to trade with. That's how they are modernising their country via a significant trade surplus. Otherwise it's back to the paddy fields. The Chinese have essentially become capitalists today. Just like the Russians too. They just don't like to admit it much. The Cold War is over - or did someone forget to mention it to you ? Graham - who has actually visited the PRC on business. p.s where do you think most consumer goods are manufactured these days ? you seem to not believe that the mainland Chinese are going to attack Taiwan sooner or later to being them back under Communist control,and that the US would not use it's carrier groups to oppose that move. There's too much to lose in an actual 'shooting war'. At some point in China's modernization,they may decide they can go it alone or just trade with counties such as France and Germany. Posturing is another matter. Who wants to gamble on it being 'posturing'? They've STATED they intend to retake Taiwan,and their actions in modernizing their military support this. Hong Kong hasn't become or been forced to be 'Communist' btw since becoming a special administrative region. HK is slowly being converted.(the 'boil the frog' concept) You need to keep up with the news. -- Jim Yanik jyanik-at-kua.net |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in
: "Peter Kemp" wrote in message ... On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:00:50 +0100, Pooh Bear wrote: "Thomas J. Paladino Jr." wrote: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ina/tu-22m.htm Two part question; first, do you think that China will actually succeed in it's acquisition attempts regarding the Backfire, and if so, how many would they end up with? Irrelevant Second, what does this mean to the the US? Bugger all ! China needs the USA ( and the rest of the western world ) to trade with. That's how they are modernising their country via a significant trade surplus. Otherwise it's back to the paddy fields. Trade isn't the be all and end all of avoiding war. France was Germany's biggest trading partner in 1939. And from June 1940 onwards, the difference is that the West is unlikely to resume trade with China while a war is going on. Keith These days,with the French and Germans having illegally traded with Iraq,I would not be so certain that some 'Western' nations would not continue their trade with red China even if war broke out against Taiwan with the US supporting Taiwan. -- Jim Yanik jyanik-at-kua.net |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Yanik" wrote in message .. . "Keith Willshaw" wrote in : These days,with the French and Germans having illegally traded with Iraq,I would not be so certain that some 'Western' nations would not continue their trade with red China even if war broke out against Taiwan with the US supporting Taiwan. There's damm little evidence for either of those nations trading on any significant scale with Iraq and they are unlikely to rush to buy the plastic gewgaws China makes for Walmart etc. Keith ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Actually, PRC assets do not monitor the U.S. Pacific Command in the number or manner Ivan did. Very few (if any) air shadowing of CVBGs, let alone sub or AGI activity off of U.S. bases in Okinawa, Guam or Hawaii. They do concentrate on Taiwan, Vietnam, India, Koreas, Japan, Russia and their own dissidents, though. Pooh Bear wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Pooh Bear wrote: If the USA chooses to spy on the PRC, I'm unsurprised that the PRC wishes to try and deter such action. Ramming aircraft in international airspace seems, well, clumsy of them. From what I heard it wasn't actually 'ramming'. Foolish airborne jousting perhaps ? I would be interested to see the reaction of the USA to Chinese spy planes off its shores ! They use "fishing" boats, instead. In international waters no doubt ? Somewhat less effective though. Don't ever forget that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander too. Graham Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access! |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:10:27 GMT, Michael Wise wrote:
The Chinese have essentially become capitalists today. Just like the Russians too. They just don't like to admit it much. Thieving capitalists who invent nothing and simply copy/counterfeit what the rest of the world creates. Didn't people use to say that about Japan? -- "It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia (Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Yanik wrote: Pooh Bear wrote in : There's too much to lose in an actual 'shooting war'. At some point in China's modernization,they may decide they can go it alone or just trade with counties such as France and Germany. With regard to that specific point, don't forget that France and Germany are in the EU. Selective trade with certain EU members only would attract the attention of the European Comission which would embargo such a stance ( assuming that France and Germany for example were even dumb enought to go along with such a situation in the first place ). Also there is free trade in the EU. It makes as much sense as suggesting that you could trade with Texas and California but not the rest of the USA. Graham |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CAAC in China had approved below 116kg aircraft sold in China without airworthiness cetificate | Luo Zheng | Home Built | 0 | June 27th 04 03:50 AM |
"Boeing sale to China skirts ban on technology transfer" | Mike | Military Aviation | 1 | February 6th 04 04:57 AM |
China to buy Eurofighters? | phil hunt | Military Aviation | 90 | December 29th 03 05:16 PM |
Vietnam, any US planes lost in China ? | Mike | Military Aviation | 7 | November 4th 03 11:44 PM |
RUSSIAN WAR PLANES IN ASIA | James | Military Aviation | 2 | October 1st 03 11:25 PM |