New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#351 Yesterday 19:18:27
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,393
- Website
Re: Peter Zeihan again: and also other thinkers:
Budgets: This thread is about Peter Zeihan. He has said China's navy is short range, not able to operate in deep water or far from Chinese shores. If a conflict with China breaks out, position 2 or 3 destroyers near Singapore and blockade shipping to China. That's it. Cut off oil imports to China. Cut off food imports. Cut off agricultural inputs (fertilizer, etc). Chinese civilization will be over in 2 years.
Peter Zeihan: World Order Falling Apart: Trump, Global Chaos & the End Of Chinese Empire
Offline
Like button can go here
#352 Yesterday 19:26:03
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,393
- Website
Re: Peter Zeihan again: and also other thinkers:
If you're still worried about Purchasing Power Parity, here's a comparison of navy ships: (from Wikipedia)
Russian navy:
13 Ballistic missile submarines
12 Cruise missile submarines
13 Nuclear-powered attack submarines
19 Diesel/electric-powered attack submarines
9 Special-purpose submarines
1 Aircraft carrier (in commission, but not operational)
2 Battlecruisers
2 Cruisers
9 Destroyers
12 Frigates
c. 79 Corvettes
17 Landing ships
50+ Landing craft
5 Patrol ships
c. 60+ Patrol boats (significant numbers of additional offshore patrol vessels/light patrol boats are operated by the Russian Coast Guard, Federal Protective Service, Russian National Guard and other agencies)
43+ Mine countermeasures vessels
18 Special-purpose (intelligence) ships
Numerous other auxiliaries
United States Navy:
Commissioned (USS) – 233
Aircraft carrier – 11
Amphibious assault ship – 9
Amphibious command ship – 2
Amphibious transport dock – 13
Attack submarine – 48
Ballistic missile submarine – 14
Classic frigate – 1
Cruiser – 7 (of 20)
Destroyer – 76
Dock landing ship – 10 (of 12)
Expeditionary mobile base – 4
Guided missile submarine – 4
Littoral Combat Ship – 1
Littoral combat ship – 26 (of 31)
Mine countermeasures ship – 4
Submarine tender – 2
Technical research ship – 1
Non-commissioned (USNS) – 85
Cable ship – 1
Dry cargo ship – 14
Expeditionary fast transport – 12
Expeditionary transfer dock – 2
Fast combat support ship – 2
Fleet ocean tug – 1
High speed transport – 2
Hospital ship – 2
Instrumentation ship – 1 (of 2)
Maritime prepositioning ship – 4
Ocean surveillance ship – 5
Offshore supply vessel – 1
Replenishment oiler – 17
S.A.S.W.S Vessel A – 4
Salvage ship – 2 (of 4)
Survey ship – 7
Vehicle cargo ship – 8 (of 57)
Support (MV, RV – or no prefix) – 66
Barracks ship – 21
Container ship – 5
Dry dock – 2
Fast sea frame – 1
Fuel tanker – 5
Harbor tug – 12
Large harbor tug – 5
Oceanographic research ship – 6
S.A.S.W.S Vessel A – 4
Sea-based X-band Radar – 1
Self Defense Test Ship – 1
Torpedo trials craft – 2
Unclassified miscellaneous – 1
Ready Reserve Force ships (MV, SS, GTS) – 55
Aviation logistics support ship – 2
Crane ship – 4
Vehicle cargo ship – 49 (of 57)
Reserve Fleet ships (USS, USNS) – 26
Cruiser – 13 (of 20)
Dock landing ship – 2 (of 12)
Dry dock – 1
Expeditionary fast transport – 2
Instrumentation ship – 1 (of 2)
Littoral combat ship – 5 (of 31)
Salvage ship – 2 (of 4)
Under construction – 48
Aircraft carrier – 3
Amphibious assault ship – 2
Amphibious transport dock – 2
Attack submarine – 11
Ballistic missile submarine – 1
Destroyer – 11
Expeditionary fast transport – 2
Expeditionary mobile base – 2
Frigate – 1
Littoral combat ship – 1
Replenishment oiler – 5
Survey ship – 1
Towing, salvage and rescue ship – 6
On order – 49
Aircraft carrier – 2
Amphibious assault ship – 1
Amphibious transport dock – 2
Attack submarine – 9
Ballistic missile submarine – 2
Barracks ship – 2
Destroyer – 15
Expeditionary fast transport – 1
Expeditionary medical ship – 3
Frigate – 1
Medium landing ship – 1
Ocean surveillance ship – 2
Replenishment oiler – 4
Towing, salvage and rescue ship – 4
Offline
Like button can go here
#353 Yesterday 20:50:17
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,313
Re: Peter Zeihan again: and also other thinkers:
America is much more aquatic than the Russians for good reasons. Are we a Duck or a Swan?
At least we are not a Goose. AKA Flying Carp.
It makes very little sense for the Russians to have a Navy, but they are in love with the idea it seems.
But they are quite the thing for Eurasian/Asian Land Wars.
I think it was always wrong to think that an industrial superpower was a danger in the near Russian area. Per Peter Zeihan, trans and trucks are just not the equal to water transportation, if you can have water transportation.
The British fetish to chase the Russians around and try to get us do so as well, is not suitable to our needs.
You need to consider that it is possible that the aristocrat greens now believe that they can survive a nuclear war between America and a major Asian power. In their infantile dreams they may think that 9/10ths of the human race can be killed off while the hide in their plush bunkers. Then they come out and rule the remnants.
We are not interested in that plan.
Ending Pending 
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here