You know, if you could just string 2 thoughts together coherently it would really help.
Knock it off. You’ve run this urine theme into the ground and it’s obnoxious.
No more personal comments like this, thanks. The rule is that you have to attack the argument and not the poster.
India has been operating aircraft carriers since 1961. China has still yet to launch a rust bucket that began construction in 1985, much less put it through sea trials, commission it and give it a shake-down cruise. Somehow I can foresee issues cropping up during the sea trials on a hull that began construction 26 years ago.
Also: Taiwan Strait. You might notice that it’s only 180km from Taiwan to the mainland, putting it well within range of the Chinese air force. Hell, it puts it within range of a Sopwith Camel.
Noted.
I suspect that the purpose of the carrier is domestic propaganda at least as much as it is power projection.
[QUOTE=From link in OP]
But his remarks confirm the impression of many Western observers that Beijing’s leaders see military power as important for national prestige and as a counter-balance to US naval power in the Pacific.
“It would have been better for us if we acted sooner in understanding the oceans and mapping out our blue-water capabilities earlier,” General Qi said. “We are now facing heavy pressure in the oceans. All of the great nations in the world own aircraft carriers: they are symbols of a great nation.”
[/QUOTE]
China is trying to present itself as one of the big boys, and all the other big boys have carriers. Once they build this one, they can parade it around their coastal cities and have all of their people think what a great nation China is that built such a magnificent ship. Basically the same idea as the Bejing Olympics, and the Shanghai Expo.
I’m not sure that’s a given. No one thinks that the US, UK, or France are superpowers because they have flattops.
Spain, Italy, Thailand, India, Brazil each have one. Are those carriers increasing the prestige of the owners?
I don’t know what the Chinese people think. Do you?
Here’s me sticking my tongue out at you. 
It’s the smallest aircraft carrier in the world. Really.
It’s also an expensive white elephant. Costs a fortune to maintain and is good for nothing. They do the occasional training, and they’ve sent it to evacuate tourists stranded by flooding in the South. Someone’s pockets got lined for obtaining it though. Most recently, the military has been trying to buy a bunch of used submarines, from Germany I think. Over here, it’s always about getting kickbacks.
[QUOTE=Siam Sam]
It’s the smallest aircraft carrier in the world. Really.
[/QUOTE]
Not that I doubt you, but…
-XT
Most people don’t realize this, but the Indian navy has conducted extensive carrier born operations against Pakistan in all their major wars and even stared down an American fleet in 1971 when the Americans looked like they were going to intervene on Pakistan’s behalf. Aircraft carriers are of no real use beyond prestige to China but pretty serious business for India.
Seems appropriate for Thailand.
Okies. Dispense with the ‘urine’ – gotcha. 
Though all’s fair in flame-y threads and fretful Semper Fidelis flag-flying reposts. No need for censure; I’m a big boy.
Hey. Thaksin’s gotta curry favor with Thais somehow if he’s to lead again and 500-Baht handouts only go so far!
I don’t consider this to be a serious issue.
China has an aircraft carrier. So what?
The reason why our carriers are so effective is because there are so many countries that want them patrolling the world like a cop on the beat. I don’t see a Chinese Carrier being welcomed in much of the world.
China has only fought three wars since the Communists came to power in 1949-
Korea in 1951-53, a border skirmish with India in 1962, and a punative war against Vietnam in 1979 that went nowhere. In none of those conflicts did the Chinese Military cover themselves in glory.
China’s main threat right now is that it’s growing in unexpected ways economically, that the “one-Child” policy has caused a population that is aging disproportionately. While htey have a growing middle class, they have a large peasent population looking in the window at the fancy meals being served.
We and China have a symbiotic relationship right now that is ill-served by conflict. They depend on our markets and our keeping the waterways open for effective trade around the world, we depend on them to finance our debt because no one wants to make the hard choices in Washington.
Incidentally, someone on this board determined once that it’s the only aircraft carrier in the world that could navigate the series of canals and locks that allow access to the Great Lakes in America. So if Thailand ever invades us, that will be the sneaky move to watch out for!
I disagree a bit.
They did quite well in the opening stages of their participation in the Korean War, really pretty much kicked the crap out of the weary U.S. 8th army. A fair bit of that can be laid to failures of American leadership, but it doesn’t really cheapen the Chinese victories much - they executed their offensive extremely well. Afterwards the superiority of U.N. air and ground firepower tore them up once the fight became more static, but it is notable that despite very heavy casualties they never collapsed. I give them a solid tie.
In 1962 they again beat the crap out of the Indian army in a limited engagement, which was again woefully unprepared. I’d call this a straight up win.
Vietnam, I’ll give you. They moved sluggishly and despite a solid numerical superiority seemed to have taken worse than they gave. Not an impressive performance.
I’d consider this sufficient grounds for preemptive bombing of the kingdom. Better safe than sorry!
The “heavy casualties” in Korea are largely either misreporting, or straight up American propaganda. China’s casualty figures for the Korean war are far lower than the American estimates. Here is a brief rundown. While I wouldn’t take everything written there as gospel as it is clearly not an unbiased viewpoint, the American reckoning of Chinese casualties is pretty laughable. The idea the China’s mostly German and (pre-stalinist purge) Soviet trained army commanders, with decades of experience fighting and winning against better armed enemies, would resort to “human wave” attacks is silly.
Without refighting the Korean war, (again), the point was, the PLA has never really been a major force outside China itself.
Nor does China have a great naval tradition, exactly. Our Aircraft carriers are effective because we built hundreds of them (if you count WWII Escort Carriers), we learned lessons with each design, deployed them in numerous conflicts.
What worries me about China is so much of the world economy is now tied into a country with no democratic traditions, a vast disparity between a large population of rural poor and a smaller middle class of industrial elites top off by an aging communist leadership.
It sounds a lot like the recipe for 1787 France.
Perhaps not a great recent naval tradition, but don’t forget Zheng He, the Eunuch Admiral.