<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Misunderstanding Chinese Intentions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:50:23 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Commentary &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Bad News from RAND</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-130934</link>
		<dc:creator>Commentary &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Bad News from RAND</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-130934</guid>
		<description>[...] back defense outlays, China is accelerating.  This year&#8217;s announced military budget reflects the 18th double-digit increase in the last 19 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] back defense outlays, China is accelerating.  This year&#8217;s announced military budget reflects the 18th double-digit increase in the last 19 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yuanyuan</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-129420</link>
		<dc:creator>yuanyuan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:44:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-129420</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;www.yahoo.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;cool&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="www.yahoo.com" rel="nofollow">cool</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ex-fetus</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-123170</link>
		<dc:creator>Ex-fetus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-123170</guid>
		<description>&quot;Ex-fetus is way behind the time… first china has a very good air force.. for homeland defense probably the best short of the US…&quot;

No, China has a horrible Air Force.
I&#039;m not sure it even could be considered an Air Force;

http://www.softwar.net/plaaf.html

Peoples Liberation Army Air Force.
It is the largest in the world, with over 6,000 targets, half of which might actually be able to take off, if there was fuel for them.
We are not sure what the kill ratio would be against the F-15, which is a 2nd line American fighter.  We are not sure because NONE of the plane types used by the Chinese have ever shot down a F-15.  AFAIK, the score against Soviet block fighters is about 120 to 0 .  That&#039;s right ZERO.
Anybody that thinks the PLAAF is more then a large group of rusty targets is clueless about air power.
Human wave attacks don&#039;t work with aircraft.  Especially Fighters.  Behind every human wave attack was a political officer with a machine gun.  Can&#039;t do that with air planes.
The Syrian Air Force developed a special maneuver to deal with Israeli F-15&#039;s.  As soon as their threat receiver went off, telling them that a F-15 had a target lock on them, they would chop throttle, pull straight up and as soon as the stall alarm went off, they would punch out.  The IAF is very adaptable, as soon as they saw what the Syrians were doing, they would hold off on their launch for a heart beat to see if the Syrian Pilot was going to stay and die.
That way they could save missiles for the ones that wanted to die.
I expect the Chinese would soon learn the technique.

There are limits to how many aircraft can be put in the air at one time.  Look at that URL and see how many air bases the PLAAF has.  Taking off in pairs ( NOT recommended and maybe beyond the ability of Chinese pilots, depending on the runways) with a 30 second interval between pairs and it takes 6 minutes to get a squadron up.  Lets ball park it at 4 per minute.  So in an hour any one airbase can put up 240 aircraft.  I use an hour because most Soviet Fighters have only 90 minutes or so of fuel on board.  Strike fighters and recon fighters have more, but not much.  So You either send them off in squadrons, 6 minutes apart, or you orbit the base while the strike force forms up.  If they go off in squadrons, you lose the effect of an attack by large numbers of aircraft.  If you have them form up into wings, you lose range.
No, the practical difficulties are beyond the Chinese capabilities.
Then there is the political side.  The cold war came about because BOTH sides knew the other was doomed, it was just a matter of waiting.  Both sides were right.  Why should the thousands of years old Middle Kingdom take a chance on losing everything when they can wait a few centuries for the USA to collapse?  It might not even be that long.

BTW, nobody is going to attack China thru the air.  Only the USA and Russia have the strategic bombers that can do that.  The PLAAF couldn&#039;t stop either nation, if they were stupid enough to do that.  A B-2 could go anywhere in China and the PLAAF wouldn&#039;t know it was there until the bombs went off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Ex-fetus is way behind the time… first china has a very good air force.. for homeland defense probably the best short of the US…&#8221;</p>
<p>No, China has a horrible Air Force.<br />
I&#8217;m not sure it even could be considered an Air Force;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.softwar.net/plaaf.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.softwar.net/plaaf.html</a></p>
<p>Peoples Liberation Army Air Force.<br />
It is the largest in the world, with over 6,000 targets, half of which might actually be able to take off, if there was fuel for them.<br />
We are not sure what the kill ratio would be against the F-15, which is a 2nd line American fighter.  We are not sure because NONE of the plane types used by the Chinese have ever shot down a F-15.  AFAIK, the score against Soviet block fighters is about 120 to 0 .  That&#8217;s right ZERO.<br />
Anybody that thinks the PLAAF is more then a large group of rusty targets is clueless about air power.<br />
Human wave attacks don&#8217;t work with aircraft.  Especially Fighters.  Behind every human wave attack was a political officer with a machine gun.  Can&#8217;t do that with air planes.<br />
The Syrian Air Force developed a special maneuver to deal with Israeli F-15&#8217;s.  As soon as their threat receiver went off, telling them that a F-15 had a target lock on them, they would chop throttle, pull straight up and as soon as the stall alarm went off, they would punch out.  The IAF is very adaptable, as soon as they saw what the Syrians were doing, they would hold off on their launch for a heart beat to see if the Syrian Pilot was going to stay and die.<br />
That way they could save missiles for the ones that wanted to die.<br />
I expect the Chinese would soon learn the technique.</p>
<p>There are limits to how many aircraft can be put in the air at one time.  Look at that URL and see how many air bases the PLAAF has.  Taking off in pairs ( NOT recommended and maybe beyond the ability of Chinese pilots, depending on the runways) with a 30 second interval between pairs and it takes 6 minutes to get a squadron up.  Lets ball park it at 4 per minute.  So in an hour any one airbase can put up 240 aircraft.  I use an hour because most Soviet Fighters have only 90 minutes or so of fuel on board.  Strike fighters and recon fighters have more, but not much.  So You either send them off in squadrons, 6 minutes apart, or you orbit the base while the strike force forms up.  If they go off in squadrons, you lose the effect of an attack by large numbers of aircraft.  If you have them form up into wings, you lose range.<br />
No, the practical difficulties are beyond the Chinese capabilities.<br />
Then there is the political side.  The cold war came about because BOTH sides knew the other was doomed, it was just a matter of waiting.  Both sides were right.  Why should the thousands of years old Middle Kingdom take a chance on losing everything when they can wait a few centuries for the USA to collapse?  It might not even be that long.</p>
<p>BTW, nobody is going to attack China thru the air.  Only the USA and Russia have the strategic bombers that can do that.  The PLAAF couldn&#8217;t stop either nation, if they were stupid enough to do that.  A B-2 could go anywhere in China and the PLAAF wouldn&#8217;t know it was there until the bombs went off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc Malone</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-122736</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc Malone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:40:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-122736</guid>
		<description>I just read in one of these news articles online linked from RCP in the last few days a side note that, apparently, China has greatly reduced its oil purchases lately.

  I can&#039;t decide if it&#039;s because they&#039;re expecting their economy to shrink along with the U.S., or if they were just pushing up prices by increasing demand.  Need more info....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just read in one of these news articles online linked from RCP in the last few days a side note that, apparently, China has greatly reduced its oil purchases lately.</p>
<p>  I can&#8217;t decide if it&#8217;s because they&#8217;re expecting their economy to shrink along with the U.S., or if they were just pushing up prices by increasing demand.  Need more info&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck Pelto</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-122648</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck Pelto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:19:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-122648</guid>
		<description>TO: Northern Light
RE: China v. US

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;I’m confused. So China is arming to attack the USA? Why? America is China’s best customer.&lt;/i&gt; -- Northern Light&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Because:

[1] US protects Taiwan
[2] The Politburo is getting a big head
[3] The Politburo understands that if the capitalism goes on for too long, their regime will go the way of the previous imperial dynasties

Hope that helps....but....well....I have my doubts....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[With Capitalism people prey upon People. With Communism its just the reverse.]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TO: Northern Light<br />
RE: China v. US</p>
<blockquote><p><i>I’m confused. So China is arming to attack the USA? Why? America is China’s best customer.</i> &#8212; Northern Light</p></blockquote>
<p>Because:</p>
<p>[1] US protects Taiwan<br />
[2] The Politburo is getting a big head<br />
[3] The Politburo understands that if the capitalism goes on for too long, their regime will go the way of the previous imperial dynasties</p>
<p>Hope that helps&#8230;.but&#8230;.well&#8230;.I have my doubts&#8230;.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Chuck(le)<br />
[With Capitalism people prey upon People. With Communism its just the reverse.]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Northern Light</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-122622</link>
		<dc:creator>Northern Light</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-122622</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m confused. So China is arming to attack the USA? Why? America is China&#039;s best customer. China is practicing 19th Century style capitalism. The army is to keep the working class in line. The capitalists in China (although they stick to the brand name &quot;Communism&quot;) learned the nature of capitalism from reading Karl Marx. That&#039;s why they sell poison and lead from time to time.

One thing I wonder. How much U.S. Army equipment is made in China these days?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m confused. So China is arming to attack the USA? Why? America is China&#8217;s best customer. China is practicing 19th Century style capitalism. The army is to keep the working class in line. The capitalists in China (although they stick to the brand name &#8220;Communism&#8221;) learned the nature of capitalism from reading Karl Marx. That&#8217;s why they sell poison and lead from time to time.</p>
<p>One thing I wonder. How much U.S. Army equipment is made in China these days?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-122534</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-122534</guid>
		<description>&quot;...they want a global order where America is cut down to size as only one of many powers&quot;

The problem isn&#039;t that China believes in that.  The problem is that many Americans believe in that.

Today China supports Iran&#039;s nuclear development.  I&#039;ve always wondered why.  Now I think I know.  

In the Chinese leadership there must be Americanists and anti-Americanists.  Sort of like the Arabists in the US.  Perhaps we can influence the outcome of this contest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;they want a global order where America is cut down to size as only one of many powers&#8221;</p>
<p>The problem isn&#8217;t that China believes in that.  The problem is that many Americans believe in that.</p>
<p>Today China supports Iran&#8217;s nuclear development.  I&#8217;ve always wondered why.  Now I think I know.  </p>
<p>In the Chinese leadership there must be Americanists and anti-Americanists.  Sort of like the Arabists in the US.  Perhaps we can influence the outcome of this contest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kabud</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-122004</link>
		<dc:creator>kabud</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 04:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-122004</guid>
		<description>dan:

cant agree more

Interesting about OBAMA</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>dan:</p>
<p>cant agree more</p>
<p>Interesting about OBAMA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck Pelto</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-121640</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck Pelto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-121640</guid>
		<description>TO: All
RE: Mongo-Mentality

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;I wonder why Chang doesn’t view US military spending as dangerous. Its vastly more than is needed to defend the US homeland.&lt;/i&gt; -- Mongo&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Mongo obviously can&#039;t think any further ahead than his next plate of beans.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Candy-gram for Mongo.]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TO: All<br />
RE: Mongo-Mentality</p>
<blockquote><p><i>I wonder why Chang doesn’t view US military spending as dangerous. Its vastly more than is needed to defend the US homeland.</i> &#8212; Mongo</p></blockquote>
<p>Mongo obviously can&#8217;t think any further ahead than his next plate of beans.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Chuck(le)<br />
[Candy-gram for Mongo.]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck Pelto</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/misunderstanding-chinese-intentions/comment-page-1/#comment-121636</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck Pelto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=35081#comment-121636</guid>
		<description>TO: All
RE: Guys and Gals

The Russians and the Communist Chinese have been gearing up for war with US since mid-September 1999, when Clinton broke the last of all his promises to the Russians about what we were doing in Kosovo. Ever since that date:

[1] The Russians began rearming themselves for war.
[2] The Russians entered into an alliance with the Communist Chinese regime.
[3] The Communist Chinese started building and posting more and more missiles on the Straits of Formosa.
[4] The Communist Chinese started seriously working towards a &#039;blue-water&#039; navy.

Modern warfare requires a LOT of materiale and high-tech. That isn&#039;t established overnight. Indeed it takes years to develop. Look at how long it took Nazi Germany to build up to the point they were confident they could take on the world....1932-1940. Extrapolate for the advancement of technology.

Enjoy,

Chuck(le)
[If you think things are bad now, just wait.....]

P.S. If want it to come on faster, vote for Obama.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TO: All<br />
RE: Guys and Gals</p>
<p>The Russians and the Communist Chinese have been gearing up for war with US since mid-September 1999, when Clinton broke the last of all his promises to the Russians about what we were doing in Kosovo. Ever since that date:</p>
<p>[1] The Russians began rearming themselves for war.<br />
[2] The Russians entered into an alliance with the Communist Chinese regime.<br />
[3] The Communist Chinese started building and posting more and more missiles on the Straits of Formosa.<br />
[4] The Communist Chinese started seriously working towards a &#8216;blue-water&#8217; navy.</p>
<p>Modern warfare requires a LOT of materiale and high-tech. That isn&#8217;t established overnight. Indeed it takes years to develop. Look at how long it took Nazi Germany to build up to the point they were confident they could take on the world&#8230;.1932-1940. Extrapolate for the advancement of technology.</p>
<p>Enjoy,</p>
<p>Chuck(le)<br />
[If you think things are bad now, just wait.....]</p>
<p>P.S. If want it to come on faster, vote for Obama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
