Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China to build 93,000-ton atomic-powered aircraft carrier:source
The Hankyoreh ^ | Mar.28,2007

Posted on 03/28/2007 8:29:26 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-252 next last
To: 3AngelaD

& how exactly does information about W-88 warheads & B-2 bombers help you build aircraft carriers??


21 posted on 03/28/2007 8:44:51 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Robe

See also:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1808527/posts


22 posted on 03/28/2007 8:45:05 PM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

heh. I can't wait until they start landing practice; especially at night.


23 posted on 03/28/2007 8:45:08 PM PDT by Dr. Marten (Bush Immigration Policy: No Illegal Alien Left Behind! (http://thehorsesmouth.blog-city.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

there will nothing left of US tech in 20 years - except management, legal, sales & marketing. all engineering, development, and manufacturing - will be in china and elsewhere.


24 posted on 03/28/2007 8:46:37 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Interesting source:

The Hankyoreh is a progressive newspaper, decisively committed to journalistic freedom, democracy, peaceful coexistence and national reconciliation between South and North Korea, which were divided by external forces after World War II. The Hankyoreh is unrelenting but fair in coverage. It does not negate the philosophy of the free market economy, individual liberty and personal freedom. But it accepts that the more detrimental effects of an unbridled market economy should be regulated by various means.

25 posted on 03/28/2007 8:47:45 PM PDT by GATOR NAVY (QMC(SW) Ret.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
The world is going to be a very interesting place in about 20 years.

Perhaps I'm being optimistic, but when you have Japan to the East, India to the Southwest and Russia to the North, I don't think China can do a lot.

26 posted on 03/28/2007 8:47:59 PM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

Are you serious ???


27 posted on 03/28/2007 8:50:13 PM PDT by Obie Wan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Obie Wan

Pretty much. Russia, Japan and India don't like China and I doubt China can take on all three.


28 posted on 03/28/2007 8:51:14 PM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki; Millee; carlr; PaulaB; Maximus of Texas; EX52D; ontap
Building a 93,000-ton atomic-powered aircraft carrier...

And successfully operating a 93,000-ton atomic-powered aircraft carrier and its air wing in combat...

Are two entirely different things!

Even if they do it... the Chicago Way!
29 posted on 03/28/2007 8:51:40 PM PDT by Bender2 (I must admit what I said was not what was on my mind, but it did kinda make sense when I said it...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Bottom line is that they can't develop these kinds of technologies on their own, they have developed what they have by spying, stealing, buying or borrowing. If they could do it on their own steam, they would have, but they can't. Nor do they have the same kind of cultural prejudice against stealing like we do. Like Mick Jagger said, they ain't too proud to beg. And I realize if you are a Chinese spy I will be among the first to be rounded up when you all take over!


30 posted on 03/28/2007 8:52:44 PM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Bender2

IF the timeframe in the article are accurate,they would have operated carriers for atleast 8 years before the N-powered one comes into service.


31 posted on 03/28/2007 8:53:30 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
I'm 80% with you. Reserving 20% because the Chinese are mercenary little bastards.

LBT
-=-=-
32 posted on 03/28/2007 8:53:56 PM PDT by LiberalBassTurds (baubau is an jihadi disinformation troll, you can't hide your posting history pal...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
No surprise. It's annoying that the international community didn't harrass them for the purchase of all the old Soviet carriers for "casino barges" (YEAH RIGHT!)

And don't give me this "military training only bs". As if that Varyag would sit in the harbor if a war broke out. Please.

33 posted on 03/28/2007 8:54:09 PM PDT by rjp2005 (Lord have mercy on us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

China will prove once again what it and Russia have proven before. Commies are effective at copying a current generation war machine but they have no foresight.

The weapons systems they bring on line in 2020 will be 15+ years behind what the U.S. is bringing on line in 2020.

I flew in some Tupolov's in Viet Nam in the 1990's and they were disasters but they were relatively true copies of 707's. However, Boeing didn't plan for the cockroaches crawling across the interior walls (true) nor did they equip the planes with overpowered engines which made the plane vibrate and give the sensation of an overpowered lawn mower. Thankfully, I made it from Hai Phong to Da Nang. I wasn't actually sure we'd make it.


34 posted on 03/28/2007 8:56:30 PM PDT by Rembrandt (We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

Russia's got some big time internal problems,Japan is getting closer to China every day,and besides the worst they could do is throw transistor radios at em,and India while a future contender to China ain't there yet !!!


35 posted on 03/28/2007 8:56:58 PM PDT by Obie Wan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

What's everyone worried about. With the new Deomcratic Majority in both Houses, they'll cut our military budget to the bone. That is unless there is a big change in majority come the next election.


36 posted on 03/28/2007 8:57:33 PM PDT by Doc91678 (Doc91678)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

If we play are cards correctly, this is a positive thing for us. The Chinese have even more of an interest than we do in keeping the oil moving through the Persian Gulf and the ME. Manufacturing is the reason their economy is booming & they need oil to keep production going. We need their cheap manufactured goods and they need our markets so yes we are dependent on each other. Like it or not, we need to partner with them against the islamonuts and we have a common interest. Say what you want, but good things are happening in China and I like the idea of having 1.5 billion muslim hating Chinese on our side.


37 posted on 03/28/2007 8:58:20 PM PDT by Archie Bunker on steroids (We'll stay out of your bedrooms, if you stay out of our children's classrooms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

thanks to Clinton.


38 posted on 03/28/2007 8:59:43 PM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Obie Wan
Perhaps, but China has fought Japan, Russia and India and the animosity is still great. Whatever internal problems they have, they all have a very potent military.

And I'm not mentioning Taiwan or the US.

39 posted on 03/28/2007 8:59:45 PM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
The Chicoms will have only one "megacarrier" completeled by 2020, and if the source you postedd is to be believed (and I'm quite skeptical) it'll be on par with our Nimitz class carriers.

The U.S., on the other hand, will still have all ten of its Nimitz carriers and three brand new Gerald R. Ford class carriers by that time.

At this rate the Chicoms might catch up in two or three centuries..

40 posted on 03/28/2007 8:59:55 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-252 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson