When light weight psycho shills like PATRICK M CRONIN (noted) write beastly articles like this.

... [blah] [blah] The Soviet Navy must expand, not contract! [blah] [blah] Cutting the soviet military budget is madness!! [blah] [blah].

The only thing missing from this analysis also happens to be the only thing that really matters: America Can Not Afford To Do This, And So Attempting To Do This Will Bankrupt America.

Just as it broke the USSR, and for exactly the same reason.

History, repeating as farce....

These are the top five shipbuilders in the world,

http://www.top5ofanything.com/index.php?h=75e48ec4

http://www.einfopedia.com/exporting-countries-major-export-countries-in-the-world.php

is this why US Navy wants to play up in Asia to join these big boys??

Can we suggest a far cheaper alternatives for American Taxpayers, please,

Get some brokendown barge, drop anchor in the South China Sea, mount a traffics lights on its platform

put on a loudspeaker and proclaim to every International ships passing thru the busiest ships lanes in the world that

we are the US Navy the greatest Navy on Earth, you must obey our traffics signs ( red means stop, green go, yellow slowdown),

I guarantee you will get plenty of due respect nevertheless.

Figure out how to pay for it, without raising taxes or cutting social programs that benefit the poor. I know the author and those who agree are probably fine screwing over the poor so the Navy gets more toys, but hopefully the rest of the country has more sense than this.

When we go to war, they go to war.

Throughout the histories of warfare, from the days of the Egyptians, the Greeks and the Persians and the conquests of the Roman Empire.

To the United Nation's Police Action in Korea, the war in Vietnam, the Gulf War, and more recently during the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.

Dogs have undergone active service at the sides of their masters, they have played the role of hero, by showing bravery under fire, saving lives (often by sacrificing their own), and bringing comfort to the injured and infirm.

Atilla the Hun, used giant Molossian dogs, precursors of the mastiff, and Talbots, ancestors of the bloodhound, in his campaigns.

During the Middle Ages, war dogs were outfited with armor and frequently were used to defend caravans.

And in the Seven Years War, Russian dogs were used as messengers by the army of Frederick the Great.

Napoleon had dogs posted as sentries at the gates of Alexandria, in Egypt, to warn his troops of any attacks.

Two centuries earlier, on this side of the Atlantic, they helped the Spaniards conquer the indians of Mexico and Peru.

Then later on, it was the native North American Indians who were to develop the use of dogs for pack and draft work, as well as for sentry duty.

In the early part of the 14th Century, the French Navy started to use attack dogs in St. Malo, France, to guard naval dock installations. These were used up to 1770, when they were abolished after a young naval officer was unfortunately killed by one of the dogs.

The first recorded American Canine Corp was during the Seminole War of 1835, and again in 1842, in Florida and Louisana, where Cuban-bred bloodhounds were used by the army to track the indians and runaway slaves in the swamps!

And during the bleakest time in the history of the United States, the Civil War, dogs were used as messengers, guards and as mascots.

In 1884, the German Army established the first organize Military School for training war dogs at Lechernich, near Berlin; and in 1885 wrote the very first training manual for MWD.

In 1898, during the Spanish-American War, dogs were used by Teddy's Roughriders, as scouts in the jungles of Cuba.

By the early part of the twentieth century most European countries were utilizing dogs in their armies and for police work.

In 1904, Imperial Russia used ambulance dogs during the Russo-Japanese War; trained by a British dog fancier, who later went on to establish the first Army Dog School in England, at the start of The Great War.

The Bulgarians and Italians employed dogs as sentries during the war in the Balkans and in Tripoli, as did the British on the Abor Expedition in the Himalayas.

Dogs were used in sizable numbers in both World War I and II, particularly by the Germans, French, Belgians; and proved to be of considerable value!

In 1988, the Israeli Special Forces sent bomb carrying Rottweilers on a suicide mission, code named "Blue and Brown," against enemy bunkers in Lebanon. But more about that later!

And when the Berlin Wall came down, Nov. 9, 1989, the East German communist government was using 5,000 dogs just to patrol the wall and another 2,500 watch dogs plus 2,700 so called horse dogs to patrol their borders.

During the Gulf War, at least 1,177 highly trained German Shepherds were use by the French forces to guard and protect their troops, supplies and aircraft. The USA used 88 teams.

But it was initially during the days of the Roman Empire, that entire formations of attack dogs, frequently equipped with armour or spiked collars were sent into battle against the enemy as a recognized and effective instruments of offensive warfare.

However, recently with the development of modern long range warfare and the consequential change in military tactics, the value of dogs as combat soldiers has steadily diminished.

But at the same time their usefulness in other military activities has increased.

This is their story and in some ways, mans as well! When we go to war, they go to war.

Throughout the histories of warfare, from the days of the Egyptians, the Greeks and the Persians and the conquests of the Roman Empire.

To the United Nation's Police Action in Korea, the war in Vietnam, the Gulf War, and more recently during the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.

Dogs have undergone active service at the sides of their masters, they have played the role of hero, by showing bravery under fire, saving lives (often by sacrificing their own), and bringing comfort to the injured and infirm.

Atilla the Hun, used giant Molossian dogs, precursors of the mastiff, and Talbots, ancestors of the bloodhound, in his campaigns.

During the Middle Ages, war dogs were outfited with armor and frequently were used to defend caravans.

And in the Seven Years War, Russian dogs were used as messengers by the army of Frederick the Great.

Napoleon had dogs posted as sentries at the gates of Alexandria, in Egypt, to warn his troops of any attacks.

Two centuries earlier, on this side of the Atlantic, they helped the Spaniards conquer the indians of Mexico and Peru.

Then later on, it was the native North American Indians who were to develop the use of dogs for pack and draft work, as well as for sentry duty.

In the early part of the 14th Century, the French Navy started to use attack dogs in St. Malo, France, to guard naval dock installations. These were used up to 1770, when they were abolished after a young naval officer was unfortunately killed by one of the dogs.

The first recorded American Canine Corp was during the Seminole War of 1835, and again in 1842, in Florida and Louisana, where Cuban-bred bloodhounds were used by the army to track the indians and runaway slaves in the swamps!

And during the bleakest time in the history of the United States, the Civil War, dogs were used as messengers, guards and as mascots.

In 1884, the German Army established the first organize Military School for training war dogs at Lechernich, near Berlin; and in 1885 wrote the very first training manual for MWD.

In 1898, during the Spanish-American War, dogs were used by Teddy's Roughriders, as scouts in the jungles of Cuba.

By the early part of the twentieth century most European countries were utilizing dogs in their armies and for police work.

In 1904, Imperial Russia used ambulance dogs during the Russo-Japanese War; trained by a British dog fancier, who later went on to establish the first Army Dog School in England, at the start of The Great War.

The Bulgarians and Italians employed dogs as sentries during the war in the Balkans and in Tripoli, as did the British on the Abor Expedition in the Himalayas.

Dogs were used in sizable numbers in both World War I and II, particularly by the Germans, French, Belgians; and proved to be of considerable value!

In 1988, the Israeli Special Forces sent bomb carrying Rottweilers on a suicide mission, code named "Blue and Brown," against enemy bunkers in Lebanon. But more about that later!

And when the Berlin Wall came down, Nov. 9, 1989, the East German communist government was using 5,000 dogs just to patrol the wall and another 2,500 watch dogs plus 2,700 so called horse dogs to patrol their borders.

During the Gulf War, at least 1,177 highly trained German Shepherds were use by the French forces to guard and protect their troops, supplies and aircraft. The USA used 88 teams.

But it was initially during the days of the Roman Empire, that entire formations of attack dogs, frequently equipped with armour or spiked collars were sent into battle against the enemy as a recognized and effective instruments of offensive warfare.

However, recently with the development of modern long range warfare and the consequential change in military tactics, the value of dogs as combat soldiers has steadily diminished.

But at the same time their usefulness in other military activities has increased.

This is their story and in some ways, mans as well!

Thanks

Admin of ab circle pro reviews

The ten years after hosting an Olympics are fatal to one-party states. To wit:

1936: Berlin Olympics / Garmisch-Partenkirchen Winter Olympics
1946: Allied Occupation

1980: Moscow Olympics
1990: Collapse of Communism

1984: Sarajevo Winter Olympics
1994: Yugoslav Civil War

2008: Beijing Olympics
2018: ?

Let’s hope China manages a smooth regime change – for once in their history!

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

China's greatest victories will not be won by it's battleships. The article suggests that China will prevent the Unification of North and South Korea to protect it's interests. I don't think this is the case. If China was to behave in a manner consistent with it's historic and cultural past, and in support of its' role as a regional power, China will work to unite Korea which would bring a powerful new ally, and be a huge victory for China in ending the Korean war, and replacing the half century old cease fire with a peace treaty. By uniting Korea China would be seen as a savior and peacemaker in the region that successfully eliminated the North's nuclear threat. This would exacerbate the image of the US and Japan as imperialist warmongers.

This scenario would eliminate China's security issues on the Korean border, remove the excuse for the presence of US forces in the DMZ, provide access to South Korean military technology, increase the potential for an East Asia free trade Zone, and fundamentally undermine the legitimacy of a strong US presence in the region. All of these outcomes are declared or undeclared goals of China's military and foreign policy.

After poking a lot of fun at the idea of an Obama pivot, Mr Cronin then points out that China has been making big advances in its part of the world -- and far beyond it -- because, in his view, American hasn't pivoted in that direction earlier*. This points out pretty clearly that his opening remarks were, to be extremely polite, either silly or malicious.

He was certainly odd in his mention of "bilateral maritime measures, like a hotline with Vietnam". Vietnam and China share an extensive land border. The whole hotline issue is a throwback to earlier technologies. Pick up a phone right now and call the White House. Or London's Scotland Yard police headquarters. Or ... you get the idea. I see no threat in the ability of China and Vietnam to talk to each other by phone. Neither do I see anything dastardly in plans for "a free trade zone among China, Japan, and South Korea." Neither does Mr Cronin, apparently. He doesn't explain why that would be a worry, just wants it to worry us.
_____________________
* Cronin: "Beijing has taken advantage of America's relatively light presence in the region over the past decade"."

China is no threat to us. Ridiculous war-mongering.

That it expands to its borders and it stops; even when the Chinese were the most powerful civilization on the planet (13th and 14th centuries), there was no world-wide Chinese colonialism, unlike the European powers later on. China has almost always engaged in defensive actions in its history: after all, they built the Great Wall to keep "barbarians" out of the Middle Kingdom (although the Romans did build Hadrian's Wall up in Britain, the comparison is still apt). China's humiliation at the end of the 19th/ beginning of the 20th century led it to insist upon renegotiating all its old colonial treaties and being treated as an equal. China's the only country that has a definitive second-strike policy for its nuclear weapons. From a military standpoint, the Chinese just want enough of a military to ensure that invasion or striking Chinese targets will be incredibly costly.

Economically, it's a different story.

Cronin is the latest Lizard Chickenhawk jerking of to war porn at any opportunity. We need to hang this intra species predator.

Can't Foreign Policy get a few Asian and African writers in who aren't part of the .lizard HQ Council On Foreign Relations?

It's so icky.

Cool, the military industrial complex gets to build and sell more ships.

Naturally we will keep shipping our jobs, companies, technology and money to China. We will keep wondering why China keeps getting stronger and the US weaker.

Maybe history is just repeating itself, have we not after all provided MILITARY assistance to the Soviet Union during the height of the cold war? Congressman Lawrence McDonald would tell you about it, just too bad the Korean Airways plane he was on was shot down by the Soviets. Gary Allen’s book about the Rockefellers explains it pretty well too, so the information is not lost.

Please do not get me wrong, I love the Chinese people, love their food, their acupuncture, Feng Shui, Tai Chi etc. What a great culture to learn from. My problem is with their autocratic government. There is a leadership that does not believe in democracy, has no respect for human rights or for intellectual property, could not care less about environmental standards and does not show a friendly attitude towards the US. Why in the world do we have a free trade agreement with them? We are currently witnessing the complete de-industrialization of the US, soon we will no longer have the infrastructure to manufacture a loaf of bread in this country.

I am not calling for a radical end of trade with China, I understand that the world economy is very fragile right now. However let us use some common sense, do we really want to allow them to economically undermine our country without at least insisting on them becoming a democracy comparable to India? I mean is everyone completely asleep at the steering wheel or are we just hypnotized by the glitzy world of electronic media, more concerned about who will get voted off tonight’s TV reality show?

So on the one hand we are feeding the Chinese dictatorship and on the other hand we are increasingly entering in an arms race with them. It is like stepping on the accelerator and the brake at the same time and then wondering why you are burning so much fuel and why the brake pads don’t last. Hallooo???

The whole thing makes no sense, you say? Well it makes a lot of sense if you are a military contractor, at least in the short run it does. Throughout history, empires designed by geniuses have risen and eventually fallen due to complete incompetence. I guess why should ours be any different.

' The whole idea of trying to start an arms race in the Pacific is ludicrous. It will produce wet dreams for the Amirals and ship builders, but will put the US deeper in debt. Don't believe anything you hear from the DOD and WH on cutting the military budget. 'When we see them talking about a wind down of our troops in Afghanistan, but then arm twist to keep there forever along with financing them for umteen more years, we know they are lying. saude aeronaves

Get used to China being a major maritime sea power, at least in the western Pacific and Indian Ocean where their life blood flows from aboard fleets of oil tankers. Remember, there is not a drop of oil in the ground anywhere in China. If there is, somebody spilled it there. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy can remain ahead of the Chinese Navy through continuously advancing submarine technology and undersea warfare, something the U.S. Navy excels at, ongoing research and development, and the maintaining of forward bases in the areas of Central Command and Pacific Command. Consider those areas the "new" NATO of the 21st century. Meanwhile, it would be a big mistake to cut back below the 175,000 force level of the Marines where they will be needed to maintain the force levels of existing MEUs and forward support. Meanwhile, the Army can maintain it's current size by shifting manpower and infrastructure capabilities to the National Guard and Reserve while maintaining training and force readiness in tose entities on par with remaining active duty forces and at less cost.

China doesn't need to worry about a confrontation with the USN. It just has to hint that it might be losing interest in US Treasury bills. That's pretty much what President Eisenhower did to Sir Anthony Eden in 1956 and it worked a treat. Of course there is a cost involved but it's much cheaper than a shooting war.

I do believe China is the most significant threat at the moment. This article at least is reasonable. I agree the title needs to reflect the work. The fact is projecting power that far across the world is hard. China can not project power but it could contest it should we find ourselves at war. The current Navy does not need more ships. It needs a professional officer corps. The war fighter mentality is all but gone. Bureaucracy needs to be eliminated. With that said currently, and in the next 10 years China will not be able to do much. We should be thinking about our response, and our capability. The answer is not tech, it is having the men educated and trained to fight well with the tech.

The two words, interests and threats, are the most dangerous words in our language as they are most often used in commentary. The greatest promoters of my interests are seldom elected to office where they can do me some good. The greatest threats to my interests and actors against them since the end of WWII have been and are those very short-sighted, ill advised and bad people who in most cases were and are those in high office in our country. The greatest terrorists, in my view, have been and are the Presidents, Secretaries of State and "Defense", leaders in the congress, who following WWII have toppled legitimate, non-threatening foreign governments in Latin America, Asia and Africa and brought down upon our country the enmity of their suffering peoples. They are the same high officers of our government who have started wars of aggression in the same far flung continents and been the cause of death and suffering of tens of millions of their inhabitants and tens of thousands of our young service people. They are the same officers who have supported the cruel dictatorships that took the place of elected governmentsand tortured and "disappeared" their own peoples in the name of fighting Communism. Our leaders have been my worst terrorists. Osama bin Laden, who took "credit" for 9/11, killed 3,000 Americans on that day. That is only a fraction of a percent of the people our leaders have killed, maimed and displaced in the past sixty-six years, including our own. That is only a fraction of those our leaders have killed in the name of the war on terror since 9/11. They, our Presidents, leaders of congress, cabinet secretaries have been the real enemies of the American people, the 99 and 44/100s percent, and our leaders still are everyone's worst terrorists.

And we have Iran on our tails, too.

Look, The Pentagon has so much fat it'll never miss what it's not even aware it has. I'm so tired of hearing media interviews with Panetta yammering on about the cuts. It's his job to get it done and report back to taxpayers where the cuts were and how much it saved us.