Dealing With China’s Aircraft Carrier

How Obama is dealing with it:

As China’s first aircraft carrier takes to the open seas today for its inaugural sea trials, the U.S. government directed a pointed question at the Chinese military: Why would you need a warship like that?

“We would welcome any kind of explanation that China would like to give for needing this kind of equipment,” U.S. State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters today. “We have had concerns for some time and we’ve been quite open with them with regard to the lack of transparency from China regarding its power projection and its lack of access and denial of capabilities.”…

Why would they want a carrier?  Uh, here’s a clue, guys – to challenge us.  You know, the only nation with a genuine navy and a substantial carrier force.

Now, there are two actual ways we can deal with this – grimly announce that we will always maintain at least three aircraft carriers for each Chinese carrier, or we can “Copenhagen” it.

Asserting that we’ll always build sufficient to be overwhelmingly powerful is essentially what Britain did in the early 20th century when challenged in battleships by Imperial Germany – after a certain point, asserting to Germany that Britain would lay two keels to one in order to maintain an overwhelmingly superior force no matter what the Germans built.  This is a fine response, but it does tend to a long-term increasing of tensions…in other words, it is an arms race.

The other way – “Copenhagen” – involves sinking the Chinese carrier.  The reason for describing it as “Copenhagen” is because in 1801 the British attacked and destroyed the Danish fleet in Copenhagen because of a concern that it might cooperate with the French against Britain.  This does have its attendant risk of full scale war, but it also is a complete solution to the problem…even if there is a war, one side then lacks a fleet to prosecute the war, so the conflict becomes rather one-sided.

I’d prefer we just sent a submarine over to Chinese waters and sank the blasted Chinese carrier.  They have no business having such weapons – the seas belong to us, won at great cost in blood and treasure and as we keep them freely open for navigation, no one has any need to challenge the United States in this area.  Unless, of course, they are envisioning a life-and-death struggle with us.  China is either just idiotically flexing muscle, or is seeking to be an existential challenge to the United States.  In neither case is it worth our while to just sit tight and let China build up a fleet.

But, you say, wouldn’t China go to war with us if we did that?  I doubt it.  Remember, the rulers of China are corrupt despots sitting atop an increasingly restive Chinese population.  Their economy is teetering on the edge of disaster and only massive exports to the United States keeps them afloat.  They don’t, at this time, have the capability of projecting power against the United States, nor our main Pacific bases.  War with us at this juncture would be entirely too costly – and so they won’t do it.  They’d complain and threaten and bluster…but at the end of the day they’d just have to take it.  And learn a valuable lesson – don’t bother putting money in to a fleet because when you put it to sea, we’re just going to sink it.

At any event, we do need a President who won’t have his staff merely ask stupid questions – anything is better than idiocy in policy.

47 thoughts on “Dealing With China’s Aircraft Carrier

  1. Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 7:12 am

    First of all China has every right to protect its maritime interests as any other nation does. As of right now China is an American trading partner and with one carrier poses no direct threat to the United States. The premise you put forward would kill thousands of Chinese citizens and make your nation no better than al Qaeda.

    Then there’s this: Consider what the United States would do if China sunk an American carrier in US waters with a submarine attack? Yes, The United States would respond with a tactical nuclear response. This is doctrine. China, were her carrier sunk would respond the same way with a measured response from a nuclear cruise missile aimed at say, Spokane.

    This is a truly dangerous idea but I know what your point is Mark. It’s the war that you crave. Destroy China decrease the US population [hopefully LA where all those “illegals” and other brown and black people live] and then pick up the pieces with religion+make mine and grow.

    If you ever thought you could run for the US Senate having written this ends any chance at you ever holding a public office.

    • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 7:48 am

      dear forker

      FUBO and you.

      • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 8:21 am

        Oh that’s an intelligent reply. Even you realize that this is an uninformed response from Mark. I doubt if any of his regular readers would support the sinking of a Chinese aircraft carrier in their territorial waters is a SANE thing to do and that it would BENEFIT America.

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 8:48 am

        a forker talking about “intelligence”
        helllllooooooo mcFly

      • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 9:06 am

        So neocon you would support the murder of 5,000 Chinese citizens in such a manner in the name of what? American national security? If this is such a serious matter why not just stop importing anything from China. Just stop. Oh, sorry that’s right, your economy would collapse and your shelves would all be empty and the young would let the old just starve.

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 9:09 am

        At White House Ramadan dinner, Barack Hussein Obama honors muslims lost on 9/11

        Does that include the 19 muslim hijackers lost on 9/11, as well? Gee, he didn’t honor Christians lost on 9/11 at the White House Easter dinner. Oh, that’s right, he didn’t have an Easter dinner.

        the only good commie or muslim’s are dead ones.

      • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 9:15 am

        Could this possibly be more off topic??? Well since you have no idea about the matter at hand and only want to play gotcha games with no information I will pick up the bat and swing. Who was the first US President to have a Passover seder at the White House?? Aren’t you right wing religious types always shouting how much you need Israel? How is Obama a bad bad Muslim “turrist” and a respecter of the Jewish traditions???

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 9:18 am

        The Obama Regime gives $40,000 of your hard-earned tax dollars to a museum for an exhibit about (wait for it)….

        M-U-S-L-I-M-S! The Manhattan Children Museum has received government (taxpayer) funding for a ‘Muslim Worlds’ exhibit. More Muslim outreach from Obama that WE get to pay for. Just what a bankrupt America needs.

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 9:20 am

        Who is paying for former Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney to badmouth the U.S. in muslim countries?

        In the last few months, the fat-ass, racist, former congresswoman has been galavanting around muslim countries, pedaling her traitorous vitriol in enemy territory like Libya and Iran. Now, it seems as if her tour is being funded by the terrorist regime in Iran.

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 9:22 am

        SWEDEN: Somali Muslims demand more welfare and free housing for their polygamous families

        “We don’t want to live in just three rooms or something like that. We want a big house. We know our rights.” Polygamy is a regular part of life for many muslim immigrants to Europe and they know how to scam the system to collect welfare benefits for multiple wives and kids.

      • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 9:28 am

        Neocon you and Anders Brievik sound quite a bit alike!

        For the record if you want you share as a “taxpayer” back for the grant to CMOM from the National Endowment for the Humanities that would come to US$ 0.0002739. I’ll send you a penny. Keep the change!

      • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 9:30 am

        Neocon you neeed to ease up on barenakedislam a little this morning.

    • Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 10:25 am

      Spokane?? No big loss. Nothing but a whole lot of blue in that area on the electoral map anyway. Maybe there is a silver lining to this armegeddon thing.

    • doug August 13, 2011 / 11:28 am


      That is a whole lot of initials after your name, I guess it means you are an expert…sorry to be rude, I don’t know what they mean.

      Anyhow Mark isn’t too far off point here. Promising 3 carriers for every one they build is a sure way to make them understand that we will have air superiority over the pacific. The problem with that is if China feels that the way the global economy is heading, they could out do us in a conventional arms race, thereby bankrupting us as we did the USSR. They might feel that way since it looks like our federal government is going the way of Europe so they could anticipate a cut in conventional weapons.

      Attacking their carrier WILL NOT provoke a nuclear war of any type. Now, if the US were to coordinate attacks to take out many military targets it is possible. And if China were to take out ONE of our carriers in our territory, our doctrine would not be to retaliate with a tactical nuclear attack….even Bush or Reagan wouldn’t do that. And Obama, he would just spin it as a jobs plan to build another carrier.

      However, if either country were to take out one carrier, it would be an attack done in such a way that there would be plausible deniability by the heads of the country, blaming it on rogue factions – it would not be done in an overt national attack.

    • Mark Edward Noonan August 13, 2011 / 11:51 am


      China does – but the Chinese government, doesn’t. This is what you fail to grasp – China is not ruled by consent and therefor, by our understanding, does not have a government with the moral or legal authority to issue a parking ticket, let alone build weapons. Once China becomes a nation governed by consent, then China can build all the carriers it wants and I wouldn’t care in the least.

      In the GOP debate the other day I watched on repeat the back and forth about what to do with Iran. Ron Paul’s position is that Iran is a sovereign nation and thus can build what it wants…and as we dealt with the USSR’s nukes for 50 years, why not just deal with Iran’s? This is probably in line with your view – and I have to say it is pure twaddle. First off, no American – no true patriot – can say that Iran’s government reflects Iranian sovereignty. Any one who says so completely rejects all that America is about. Secondly, the actual result of allowing the USSR to have nuclear weapons was a disaster for the world…it protected the heart of evil in the world and allowed it to branch out. As soon as Stalin announced an atomic bomb program, we should have destroyed it…so, too, as soon as Iran announces their’s, and as soon as China tries to build a blue water navy.

      Away with this idiocy which says the United States is bound to respect the feelings of tyrants…China’s thug rulers are of no interest to an American. Our whole duty is to do whatever we can to weaken them in the hopes that in some future time the Chinese people will rise up and overthrow them. I know you’re keeping your little list of things I say – a bizarre exercise which reveals a disturbing aspect of your mental make-up – but in this case you don’t have to…it is consistent with all my past utterances on foreign policy vis a vis tyrannical regimes. If I ever do run for office and were to be defeated on grounds that I stand as a permanent and implacable enemy of tyranny then I’d be proud to be defeated on that account…but, I wouldn’t be.

      In the end, only cowards and slaves would disagree with me on this.

    • js August 13, 2011 / 11:09 pm

      the only thing thats really clear is that Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J.,M.F. is nothing but a dizzy progressive with its head inserted right up its BEEEHIND…much like most of the ignorant pricks that enjoin liberal theology and marxism…

  2. Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 10:21 am

    This carrier is absolutely no threat to United States or any of its Pacific Allies. This carrier is the preparation of what will become a threat later. Mark, how long does it take to train a Naval Aviator? A couple of years. The zu liang is nothing more than a training and practice ship.

    You do not build a carrier force overninght. Is it worth the possibility of starting a war over this?

    • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 10:30 am

      One of the leading China defence abalysts Ma Ding Sheng says it will be at least four years before the pilots are fully trained and ten years before the ship could effectively fight in combat.

    • Mark Edward Noonan August 13, 2011 / 11:55 am


      Yes – in order to stave off a longer and worse war later. You attack evil in its infancy…don’t wait for it to get full grown.

      I know this is startling…shocking, indeed. But, think about it…better to fight them now when they’ve only got one experimental carrier, or wait until they have a force of 20 fleet carriers?

      And, at any rate, they wouldn’t fight us…not now; they simply don’t have the force capable of doing it.

      • Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 1:17 pm

        Mark, you are starting to sound like me. Go ahead and start your war. You won’t be asked to do any of the dieing. Unless of coarse Las Vegas is nuked. Better leave. Maybe Art Bell has some extra room in his bunker at Puhrump?

        You can argue yes or no on whether The United States fought agressive wars against the indians. Starting an aggresive war against the chi coms is another story.

        How do you not bring in Japan and soko and the Phillipines or any other pacific allay into this war? Are you ready to defend them against nuclear attack. You might as well throw in Vietnam into that mix. They will scream to US for help.

      • Mark Edward Noonan August 13, 2011 / 6:39 pm


        The main point is that there would be no war – China has not at the moment the capability of long range power projection. The could launch a mad-dog attack on South Korea, but that would bring South Korea and Japan in on our side. The correlation of forces are currently decisively against China…sink the carrier and all they could do is fume. And that would have to come to an end pretty quick because they desperately need to export to us.

        At any event, no such action would ever be done – the point I’m making is that you strike at evil when you can, and the early you do it the less costly it will be. Had we strangled the USSR in its cradle in 1918, the world would have been spared unspeakable horrors. Ditto with Hitler’s Germany.

        Ask yourself – why do those of us who only wish others to live in peace and prosperity have to sit down and wait for evil to become overwhelming before we’re allowed to act against them? Will you always insist upon being unteachable? Does not the late, unlamented 20th century tell you anything about how we should act towards emerging threats?

    • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 2:52 pm


      I believe they bought an unfinished shell from the russians they didnt even build the hull themselves.

      • Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 4:06 pm

        That is exactly what they bought A kuznetsov class jump carrier. The ex soviet Varayag. I just dont see this as a threat big enough to an agressive war over.

  3. Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 10:42 am

    Still though, If “hells leadeing news reporters” are against maybe starting a war. There might just be something to it. The chi coms are about ready to collapse under the weight of thier own system anyway. They just might start a war themselves to try abd postpone thier demise.

  4. bardolf August 13, 2011 / 10:48 am

    “the seas belong to us, won at great cost in blood and treasure and as we keep them freely open for navigation, no one has any need to challenge the United States in this area.”-Mark

    I don’t understand why we need to be limited to the SEAS. The whole WORLD belongs to us. We won the cold war. We had nuclear weapons first. We’re responsible for the growth of every decent economy on the face of the planet. German economy=our good works. Japanese economy=our good works. We buy Canadian oil, goods from Brazil, tons of imports from China … We’ve saved the world from communism. Only some backwater hell holes like NK even pretend toward state run economies. Even Vietnam is largely capitalistic. As soon as that monster in Cuba dies it will become a paradise without parallel.

    Sure we’re hitting some hard times now. But once we abandon the ideas that we can sit around and hope big government hands us a paycheck the old American ingenuity will help us rebound. A little more hard work, some more cooperation on common goals and less shallow cleverness and we are ready for a golden age. China has interests in Australia way more than in the US but ultimately they just want to show some might to accompany all the hard work their people have done in these last few decades. It’s a symbol of pride which is a lot easier to accomplish than a moon mission.

  5. Dying Vaginours, RFD,BFD, SOP, Contains no fillers or byproducts August 13, 2011 / 12:51 pm

    Since it’s dead as hell over at the Fork, and since talking to myself has caused mom to shut the basement door, making it real stuffy down here MOM! Your creepy “boyfriend” has been watching me in the shower again sorry, where was I? Oh, right, we (that is “I”) decided to spread my Mental droppings here where someone might actually read it.

    So you will all be welcome to drop by the Play Land website where we can all choose up sides and pretend to be demons and junk and stuff. K?

    • Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 1:05 pm

      Sorry not one bit at all. My religous beliefs stricyly proscribe holding converse with devils, demons, and the undead. Have a happy day and may God bless you. 🙂

  6. Dying Vaginours, RFD,BFD, SOP, Contains no fillers or byproducts August 13, 2011 / 1:08 pm

    Fine for you buddy, I’m telling mom not to let you or neo in, you’ll be sorry when you find out she’s making Rice Crispy Treats later.

    • Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F. August 13, 2011 / 1:42 pm

      LMAO Funny!

  7. Dying Vaginours, RFD,BFD, SOP, Contains no fillers or byproducts August 13, 2011 / 1:47 pm

    Wait, how about you and neo pretend to be ANGELS, and I can be a fairy princess?

    I like make-believe, like when I pretend to know what I’m talking about and neo answers me and then I answers him and then we write insults and then I pretend to be Caveat Emptor and I cut and paste some more junk and stuff like I know something important.

    Oh, and Bardolf made a lot of sense. For once.

    • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 2:45 pm


      spot on…..ROTFL

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 2:49 pm

        “Neocon you and Anders Brievik sound quite a bit alike!

        you, wright, King Shamir Shabazz, sound quite a bit alike.

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 3:02 pm

        strategically thinking it should join the Titanic on her maiden voyage.
        easy to conceal, later on becomes harder.
        a brand new ship and a green crew………reactor explosion…DONE!!

    • Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 4:07 pm

      Bardolf making sense never!! 🙂

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 5:17 pm

        never ever

  8. Caveat Emptor, Etcetra, Member FDIC, {Void where Prohibeted} August 13, 2011 / 3:27 pm

    Please stop, you’re embarrassing all of us!

    • Dying Vaginours,MSG, August 13, 2011 / 3:34 pm

      Capitulate Empty,

      Did you ever notice that even though there are a whole bunch of us at Delusion Land Blogs-R-Us we never comment on each other’s blog posts? I mean, isn’t that weird?

      It’s almost like we know what every one is going to say before I say it.


      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 3:39 pm

        ESP n ?

      • Dying Vaginours,MSG, August 13, 2011 / 3:54 pm

        You do realize we’re all certifiable, right? I mean, DEAMONS and HELL’S NEWSPAPER? No one takes us seriously, we’re not dangerous stupid, but we are an infantile delusional bunch inside my fevered brain.

      • neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 4:09 pm

        dont forget the GUMDROP “computer” named “pain”.
        or the LOON who thinks she was killed in the american civil war……

      • Minordojo Plain, BS,B-4,BLT,{With a nice crispy Head made of Lettuce} August 13, 2011 / 4:36 pm

        Yep, half a bubble off plumb, every one of us.

  9. neocon1 August 13, 2011 / 5:25 pm

    Why would they want a carrier?

    TAIWAN !

  10. Rightlane August 13, 2011 / 9:59 pm

    Sinking the Chinese aircraft carrier would be an extremely bad idea. First, having served aboard the USS Saratoga for 3 years, I can assure you all, there’s a learning curve involved here boy and girls and it’s a bitch. Just because they have the ship, doesn’t mean they’re ready to use it or that it’s ready to be used.
    The Chinese have every right to build and operate an aircraft carrier, regardless of whether we happen to agree with the Chinese political system or how its rule was established concerning the governed’ consent.
    For me, I can’t go so far as to say, “because my culture is vastly superior to culture I’m planning to attack because they… I’m justified in killing them. No, I would not be justified. God allows this government to govern billions of people and to attack them without provocation would be tantamount to murder for which, I would be rightly judged and found guilty by the Most High.

    • js August 13, 2011 / 11:14 pm

      ah…stop blowing smoke…you know they hacked every bit of information on this subject from US Command and Control computers ten years ago…including the blueprints to our best carriers…

      given computer technology training pilots…they wont even take a year to have this cheap imitation up and…ready to sink…

      trust me…the chinese take shortcuts in everything…it will be miracle if the damn thing doesnt sink in its 1st year

      • Green Mountain Boy August 13, 2011 / 11:48 pm

        I agree completely.

      • neocon1 August 14, 2011 / 11:07 am

        I just hope al-hussein is on it with the MOOCH when it sinks…..a three for and a new national holiday……sarcasm off of course.

Comments are closed.