"America is Losing Tomorrow’s War in the Indo-Pacific" Topic

"In 2011, the Obama administration declared a "strategic pivot" to Asia away from the Middle East. Nearly a decade later, in October 2022, the Biden White House published a National Security Strategy that stated, "No region will be of more significance to the world and everyday Americans than the Indo-Pacific." In the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, the "sense of Congress" declared its goal to "strengthen United States defense alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region to further the comparative advantage of the United States in strategic competition with the People's Republic of China." Today, despite all of these grand declarations, 86 percent of the annual U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF) still goes overwhelmingly, as it has for decades, to nations in the Middle East…"

Main page

link

Armand

Losing a war sadly may occur with the USA's current leadership, IMO …

…and that's why China is building a Blue Water Navy focused around Carrier Battlegroups…

Not so long ago the USN was the masters of the seas. And the USAF the air. I don't know if that is true anymore ?

Again our leaders' priorities are all very much skewed …

Just skimming by here. Too negative….

It might be good to check on the technical aspects of our air and naval development vs China. This administration, as others have, continues to oversee developing and building the best subs, carriers, and high tech advanced naval assets, although hampered by a too small workforce following the pandemic. The AUKUS program has had some delays but is catching up.

Meanwhile, China's new carrier launch, not really a full super carrier, is still far behind the US. It is meant to be a test bed for China to eventually create a super carrier of its own, with a number of new features. China's other two carriers are of little value, based on Russian designs from 50 years ago.

The main Chinese vessels for harassment are their destroyers. Drones may be their best chance for hurting us for real, but we have our defenses.

In today's world, calling a navy "Blue Water" surely must mean it has an operational range of more than a thousand miles. Which the Chinese do not have. The new Fujian is still steam turbine powered. And the air groups for this vessel? Who knows? My money is on ours, and our aircraft.

IMO we are far and away masters of the seas and air, with amazing building programs going on that no other nation will be matching any time soon. We still need a procurement overhaul and better recruitment. Continuing dominance with a massive force has its problems.

But the assumption that the Chinese navy is racing ahead while we do nothing because of "leadership" issues is not correct.

Politics gets in the way on too many threads, lots of theories, not lots of proof.

Well said…

Armand

But the assumption that the Chinese navy is racing ahead while we do nothing because of "leadership" issues is not correct.

I respectfully disagree … Albeit I could be wrong … but I don't think so. 'nuff said, I don't want to go in the Dawg Haus again …

Hi Legion, it's Tort under my new name. I am on this thread because I love the United States Navy.

This is a matter of facts, IMO. There is a strong element in Congress who want us to believe that the number of ships is what matters vs China. But these people want the big contracts for their districts for things like the LCS (or Little Crappy Ships, as some sailors call them)program, of which 9 were cut. Others here can explain why this overtasked and undermanned design was a flop.

Ship for ship, we are better than China and our building and design programs, as far as we are allowed to know, are very future oriented, IMO. We are about capabilities first. We are funding the future, not playing catch-up. Cost containment and inflation are factors, as they almost always have been. I have no complaints about Biden and the Navy, which is sometimes its own worst enemy. But it moves ahead.

Trump early statements on the state of the military, ie depleted, no ammo, are untrue, backed up by zero facts. Buit is not hard to find reality in military news outlets reporting regularly on unclassified developments. Obama outspent Trump first term, then a bipartisan Congress sequestered defense funds to address the deficit in the second. But Obama still spent more than enough. To quote Petraeus, the state of the US military in 2016 was "awesome", by which he meant "really good." Of course there are still problems in such a huge entity. But not like in China or Russia, as we have discussed before.

Hi Legion, it's Tort under my new name. I am on this thread because I love the United States Navy.

This is a matter of facts, IMO. There is a strong element in Congress who want us to believe that the number of ships is what matters vs China. But these people want the big contracts for their districts for things the LCS (or Little Crappy Ships, as some sailors call them)program, of which 9 were cut. Others here can explain why this overtasked and undermanned design was a flop.

Ship for ship, we are better than China and our building and design programs, as far as we are allowed to know, are very future oriented, IMO. We are about capabilities first. We are funding the future, not playing catch-up. Cost containment and inflation are factors, as they almost always have been. I have no complaints about Biden and the Navy, which is sometimes its own worst enemy. But it moves ahead.

Trump early statements on the state of the military, ie depleted, no ammo, are untrue, backed up by zero facts. Buit is not hard to find reality in military news outlets reporting regularly on unclassified developments. Obama outspent Trump first term, then a bipartisan Congress sequestered defense funds to address the deficit in the second. But Obama still spent more than enough. To quote Petraeus, the state of the US military in 2016 was "awesome", by which he meant "really good." Of course there are still problems in such a huge entity. But not like in China or Russia, as we have discussed before.

Sorry for the double message….

How Dangerous is China's "At Sea" Fujian 3rd Aircraft Carrier

link

Armand

Hey Tort ! Didn't know you were in WITSEC.

But again, like any weapon system it is only as good as its crew and leadership. Naval vessels, aircraft, etc., are no exception. The USN, USAF is superior to the PRC/CCP's forces. But are they getting all the $ they need to train, etc. ? The Chicoms have as always numbers in their favor. And they are not casualty adverse.

More like a mental health break!

The Navy says they are training, recruits say woke is not an issue, but I wonder still, and recruitment is the biggest issue.

+1 Armand thanks for the reality check on Chinese naval aviation.

The headline for the first article should have read "Chinese Give Up On Crappy Russian 1980 Carrier Design", or "Still No Aircraft For Chinese Carrier"
I am tired of the media attacks on the US military.

A votre service mon ami… (smile)

Armand

I am not attacking the US Military; I just see we need leadership starting at the very top. And set real priorities … Wastes too much $ on too much junk.

I did not mean you! I always cite procurement reform and recruitment as the biggest problems. I don't disagree with you in general. My problem with the right is that I think they believe Trump is the answer. Many factors suggest otherwise to me. Nuff said. I would prefer an experienced vet for the job.This guy would have both front line and logistics experience. This management skill set is far better for running a government IMO.

My problem with the right is that I think they believe Trump is the answer.

It may/is IMO the only solution all things considered. 'Nuff said …

This guy would have both front line and logistics experience.

Did/do but I ain't going no where …

I can always write you in! But no desk job for you, we need you closer to the action!

We can't forget about allied navies, either. The Indian Navy has really upped its game, and Japan, Australia, and New Zealand have professional navies of varying sizes.

Experience counts for quite alot: US has experience in carrier operations stretching back almost 100 years. China not quite as much…

Good for China to have ONE modern carrier. Too bad it does not have an airing…

If push came to shove my money would be on the US big time.

Woke sailors or not once lead starts flying surviving takes over and all US sailors will fight and do their job very good.

Amen brother

Those "woke" Sailors are doing pretty well in the Red Sea at present. Go Navy!

The UK carriers with 36 F35Bs, supported by Type 23s and Type 45s are fairly formidable as well; especially with a couple of Astutes up front.
The Japanese and Koreans also have very capable fleets. (I am actually planning on running a game at Historicon with a Japanese fleet up against the Chinese).

we need you closer to the action!

Those days are long over … I have to get the other hip replaced and [I hope not] maybe a knee … But thanks for thinking of me !

Sailors are doing pretty well in the Red Sea at present. Go Navy!

Yes they are, seems they know what they are doing.