The question of how the United States should respond to Chinas military modernization effort, including its naval modernization effort, has emerged as a key issue in U.S. defense planning. The question is of particular importance to the U.S. Navy, because many U.S. military programs for countering improved Chinese military forces would fall within the Navys budget.

Decisions that Congress and the executive branch make regarding U.S. Navy programs for countering improved Chinese maritime military capabilities could affect the likelihood or possible outcome of a potential U.S.-Chinese military conflict in the Pacific over Taiwan or some other issue. Some observers consider such a conflict to be very unlikely, in part because of significant U.S.-Chinese economic linkages and the tremendous damage that such a conflict could cause on both sides.

In the absence of such a conflict, however, the U.S.-Chinese military balance in the Pacific could nevertheless influence day-to-day choices made by other Pacific countries, including choices on whether to align their policies more closely with China or the United States.

Chinas naval modernization effort, which began in the 1990s, encompasses a broad array of weapon acquisition programs, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), submarines, and surface ships. Chinas naval modernization effort also includes reforms and improvements in maintenance and logistics, naval doctrine, personnel quality, education, training, and exercises.

Observers believe that the near-term focus of Chinas military modernization effort has been to develop military options for addressing the situation with Taiwan. Consistent with this goal, observers believe that China wants its military to be capable of acting as a so-called anti-access forcea force that can deter U.S. intervention in a conflict involving Taiwan, or failing that, delay the arrival or reduce the effectiveness of intervening U.S. naval and air forces.

Observers also believe that Chinas military modernization effort, including its naval modernization effort, is increasingly oriented toward pursuing additional goals, such as asserting or defending Chinas territorial claims in the South China Sea and East China Sea; enforcing Chinas viewa minority but growing view among world nationsthat it has the right to regulate foreign military activities in its 200-mile maritime exclusive economic zone (EEZ); protecting Chinas sea lines of communications; protecting and evacuating Chinese nationals in foreign countries; displacing U.S. influence in the Pacific; and asserting Chinas status as a major world power.

Potential oversight issues for Congress include the following: whether the U.S. Navy in coming years will be large enough to adequately counter improved Chinese maritime anti-access forces while also adequately performing other missions of interest to U.S. policymakers around the world; the Navys ability to counter Chinese ASBMs and submarines; and whether the Navy, in response to Chinas maritime anti-access capabilities, should shift over time to a more distributed fleet architecture.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/reports/2/137539/the-us-navy-and-china%E2%80%99s-naval-modernization.html

-----------------------------------------------



I don't have a short temper,I just have a quick reaction time to Bullsh1t!

When China has more than 12 carrier groups, the US "might" have something to worry about... Today? not so much..

----------------------------------------------

^^^ Exactly, theres also the matter of the US being at least 20 years ahead in technology even if you take into account all upcoming improvements the chinese are making.

Besides i just think the two economies are too closely linked for there to be a war, wouldn't be in the interest of either side.

=====
Speaking of the Eurofighters close-in combat prowess, Major Marc Gr�ne, CO of 742 (Zapata), the second squadron of the wing, described to assembled aviation journalists how, on a recent visit to France to demo the aircraft, he had won two out of two battles against the Dassault Rafale in mock within visual range dogfights. Both fights were a standard set-up and merge at 21,000ft and 30,000ft he recounted, adding that the higher the fight the better the Eurofighter liked it. He singled out the Eurofighters excess power as its trump card over the Rafale

China and the US should cooperate and "conquer" the world

Don't want to hear any comment from weak loser indians. they can talk once they win a gold, ok ?

^ ^ ^
What does that even mean..? I don't think Israel has won a medal, does that
make them weak militarily..?

Yu orientals and your damn medals.

-----------------

the US is so much ahead of China in everything pretty much, why the fear mongering and insecurity?

-------------------------------------------------

"theres also the matter of the US being at least 20 years ahead in technology"

There is no such thing as being 20 years ahead in anything in this day and age. There is no technology the Chinese or anyone else can't attain within 18 months if funding and engineering talent are allocated. The US lead is solely in its larger R&D spending and that is disappearing with every passing day. For starters the US is spending less and less as % of GDP on R&D, and everyone else is spending more.

the US is so much ahead of China in everything pretty much, why the fear mongering and insecurity?


probably because of 1 billion population

________________________________________