Chinese Military,Political and Social Superthread

[Wizard of OZ]

I don't think China has ever really given up its claim to TW.  That would be why they would want to reassert control over it.  I don't think the Imperial ambitons of old would make for a good argument for new territory but it never really stops ambitious nations from expanding there own territory with either religion, ideology, economic, or military methods.

 

[a_majoor]

As Robert Kaplan pointed out in "Balkan Ghosts", most of these people are driven to recover their "historical" territory, but when asked to define what that is, choose the moment their empire or nation was at its zenith. This is not confined to the various peoples of the Balkans or to China either,it also explains why aboriginal land claims in BC amount to 110% of the provincial land area.

 

[Britney Spears]

Kids, sometimes the only way you're going to figure this stuff out is to go read a history book, it will save you from asking embarrasing questions.

Regarding the Chinese need for Anschluss with Taiwan.

Did you ever wonder why the Republic of China (i.e. Taiwan) up until very recently still claimed to be the legitimate goverment of all of China (and Mongolia)? Or why they(the majority of Taiwanese) steadfastly refuse to declare independence from China?

You guessed it. The people of Taiwan, except for a small minority of austro-polynesian natives, are Chinese. the vast majority only relocated to Taiwan in 1949, most Taiwanese, when quizzed about their origins, still refer to their home towns and provinces  in mainland China where their grandparents lived until 1949.

I haven't been keeping up with the current public opinion polls, but unless things have changed drastically, most Taiwanese still favour reunification with China, but NOT under the current communist goverment. Outright seperatists are a rather new phenomenon and still a vocal minority.

Personally I think we in the west, without much understanding of the culture, are more nervous about this thing than the Chinese/Taiwanese are themselves.Taiwan and the prosperous SE portion of China are very tightly integrated culturally and economically, a big percentage of "foreign" investment in the new cities on the coast come from Taiwan.50,000 Taiwanese companies and 500,000 Taiwanese workers live and work in China. China is Taiwan's principle trading partner. War just isn't something that most people even think about.


Here's a more interesting scenario. Suppose there is a reunification of the 2 sides, which I think is rather likely in the next 20-30 years, the combined Chinese taiwanese navy would be giving the Japanese a serious run for the money as far as ruling the Se asian sea lanes. I'm not a squid but from all the numbers, the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force right now is easily the most powerful naval force in Asia, even including the Russian Pacific Fleet, but a Combined Chinese/taiwanese fleet I tihnk might be a tougher nut.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Kids, sometimes the only way you're going to figure this stuff out is to go read a history book, it will save you from asking embarrasing questions.

Regarding the Chinese need for Anschluss with Taiwan.

Did you ever wonder why the Republic of China (i.e. Taiwan) up until very recently still claimed to be the legitimate goverment of all of China (and Mongolia)? Or why they(the majority of Taiwanese) steadfastly refuse to declare independence from China?

You guessed it. The people of Taiwan, except for a small minority of austro-polynesian natives, are Chinese. the vast majority only relocated to Taiwan in 1949, most Taiwanese, when quizzed about their origins, still refer to their home towns and provinces   in mainland China where their grandparents lived until 1949.

I haven't been keeping up with the current public opinion polls, but unless things have changed drastically, most Taiwanese still favour reunification with China, but NOT under the current communist goverment. Outright seperatists are a rather new phenomenon and still a vocal minority.

Personally I think we in the west, without much understanding of the culture, are more nervous about this thing than the Chinese/Taiwanese are themselves.Taiwan and the prosperous SE portion of China are very tightly integrated culturally and economically, a big percentage of "foreign" investment in the new cities on the coast come from Taiwan.50,000 Taiwanese companies and 500,000 Taiwanese workers live and work in China. China is Taiwan's principle trading partner. War just isn't something that most people even think about.


Here's a more interesting scenario. Suppose there is a reunification of the 2 sides, which I think is rather likely in the next 20-30 years, the combined Chinese taiwanese navy would be giving the Japanese a serious run for the money as far as ruling the Se asian sea lanes. I'm not a squid but from all the numbers, the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force right now is easily the most powerful naval force in Asia, even including the Russian Pacific Fleet, but a Combined Chinese/taiwanese fleet I tihnk might be a tougher nut.

One these points, I agree with Britney Spears.

 

[Dare]

I am curious as to what kind of war you fellows seem to think China could wage against Taiwan. Cosnidering:

- Taiwan's army, if one includes third/fourth line reserves, number almost a million men, American trained and equipped, with many modern, locally produced weapons.

- The TWnes armed forces have existed for one single purpose for the last 50 years, and it isn't invading and reconquering China.

- They've had a fair bit of time to dig in, if you get my drift.

- Taiwan itself is about the size of IIRC Vancouver Island.  How well do you think you could hold Vancouver island with a million well armed and equiped troops and at least local air/naval supremacy? Most of the Chinese Air Force still flies the J-6, a copy of the Mig-19 that might have been pretty good during the Korean war, but not so much against Upgraded F-16s and Mirage 2000 and Israeli/American trained pilots.


See this map below:

See the little island labelled Jing Men? Up to this day it is held by Tawainese troops, with a lot of big calibre artillery that can strike deep into the mainland. the Mainland Chinese have attempted multiple invasions in the last 50 years, all have ended in failiure. The only serious invasion that the TWnese are worried about today is if the PLA could concentrate enough naval assets to attempt another invasion of Jing Men. The offical role of ROC Marine Corps, other than to eventually invade China and throw out the communist bandits back to Russia( hey it works so why change it) , is to rapidly reinforce the Jing Men and Peng Hu garrison via landing ships in the event of a Ml Chinese invasion. They are quite confident of their ability to hold the island should this occur. 

No one, least of all the Chinese, seriously think that China could mount any kind of effective invasion of Taiwan, even Jing Men and Ma Tsu would be rather doubtful, and you can SEE Jing Men from the skyscrapters on the coast in Xia Men! You could Hit Jing Men from the Mainland with a .50 rifle!  I personally don't believe any nation in the world, including the US, could pull off such a feat. Certainly an invasion of Taiwan would make D-Day 1944 look like a minor skirmish in comparison.

I think you're neglecting several factors. One is the increasing modernization of China's air force and naval fleet. Taiwan may have over 100 F-16s, but China has hundreds of Su-27/30s. They also have hundreds of J-11(Essentially a SU-27 copy) /J-10s (Essentially a Lavi copy). China is developing stealthy next generation aircraft as well. These are very modern aircraft, with upgraded electronics and payload. They have their own factories and can build their own aircraft at a rate vastly superior to Taiwan. That *alone* is a huge advantage and virtually guarentees air superiority. China's naval capabilities increase dramatically every year. While not enough to credibly defeat a US battlegroup, it is enough to invade Taiwan. And to assist this invasion they have some very thunderous supersonic anti-ship missiles which can do a wackload of damage. Then there are the hundreds of tactical and strategic missiles ready to hit Taiwan. Another factor is the sympathy towards mainland China in Taiwan. A sizable chunk of Taiwan would actively fight for "reunification" (including elements within the Taiwanese military itself). I think such a conflict would be among a few where we may see western space assets being knocked out.

To underestimate China would be a serious mistake.  Essentially, such a conflict comes down to who can occupy who. There's no hope of a serious Taiwanese invasion. Taiwan would definitely not win the war without external help. Jing Men? That's a speedbump. Do you honestly think China could not take that island? If they can hit it with a rifle, they sure as hell can hit it with a whole lot of other things.

 

[Britney Spears]

but China has hundreds of Su-27/30s.

36 single seat Su-27s, 40 Su-27UBK trainers, maybe 90 J-11s and about 100 Su-30MKK.
J-10 I believe is only just entering production, maybe 20-40 flying at most.

I believe the J-11's engines must still come from Russia.

Versus 150 F-16 and 60 Mirage 2000, and vastly better trained (in the US) pilots. Plus Patriot batteries on Jing Men and Taiwan proper.

Doesn't sound like very good odds to me. The Various Arab-Israeli wars do not instill much confidence in Russian training and tactics.

In the sea, the Chinese probably have a bit of an advantage with the new Russian SSKs (no one is willing to sell subs to Taiwan), but on the surface I'd still bet on Taiwan. Of course I welcome any of the air force and navy types here to correct me since this ain't my lane.......

I think it's generally believed that the Chinese, if things go down, will decide as a show of force to take Jing Men, and no doubt they could probably do it. 

 

[aesop081]

In the sea, the Chinese probably have a bit of an advantage with the new Russian SSKs (no one is willing to sell subs to Taiwan), but on the surface I'd still bet on Taiwan. Of course I welcome any of the air force and navy types here to correct me since this ain't my lane.......

When it comes to chinese subs i would tend to agree with you.  Kilo-class SSKs and Han-class SSNs pose a very disproportionate threat to Taiwan and any allied nation.  As demonstrated during the Falklands conflict in 1982 by MHS conqueror, 1 single sub can force an entire Navy to remain in port.  I'm not saying that the US and PRC naval/air forces would not stand up and fight but trust me when i say that hunting subs is a difficult task ( and a tough skill to learn at that as i found out last friday !!).  One or two subs will require you to commit a vast amount of resources to counter it.  Also on the chineses side is the fact that in the last few years, ASW training in "western" forces has not been up to what it used to be.

 

[Dare]

36 single seat Su-27s, 40 Su-27UBK trainers, maybe 90 J-11s and about 100 Su-30MKK.
J-10 I believe is only just entering production, maybe 20-40 flying at most.

I believe the J-11's engines must still come from Russia.

Versus 150 F-16 and 60 Mirage 2000, and vastly better trained (in the US) pilots. Plus Patriot batteries on Jing Men and Taiwan proper.

Doesn't sound like very good odds to me. The Various Arab-Israeli wars do not instill much confidence in Russian training and tactics.

In the sea, the Chinese probably have a bit of an advantage with the new Russian SSKs (no one is willing to sell subs to Taiwan), but on the surface I'd still bet on Taiwan. Of course I welcome any of the air force and navy types here to correct me since this ain't my lane.......

I think it's generally believed that the Chinese, if things go down, will decide as a show of force to take Jing Men, and no doubt they could probably do it. 

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/su30.asp
According to this site. They have 152 SU-30MKK's, 24 SU-30MK2's and 90 J-11's. Of course, these are all estimates, and I would not personally guarentee any of these numbers, but the SU-30 is a very capable aircraft. This added to the other thousands of fighter aircraft of older models, but still using effective missiles. It's quite formidable. In an initial engagement, it is my estimation that they would closely follow US tactics and take out many anti-air defences as possible with SF/sabotage and missiles before launching a full air raid. They could level the entire surface of Jing Men. I wouldn't be very concerned with that island if I were the Chinese. It's likely if they even chose to strike, they would have less reservations than we do about using tactical nukes. We all have to remember, that those factories that make our little cheap trinkets will be converted to military purposes if such a large scale war were to break out. They'd start pumping out planes like there's no tomorrow. That's why, despite the initial battle damage, China can sustain a wide prolonged war far longer than Taiwan and can outmatch it's production easily. Without US and/or Significant Others, Taiwan will be "reunited".

 

[Britney Spears]

The source you cite gives 100, not 152 Su-30MKK in total, 76 air force, 24 navy.

I'm not sure how far they have progressed with the production of J-11s, but I doubt they are at this point capable of producing the engines, and may still be at the stage of just assembling Russian kits. I guess that's still pretty far from locally producing any variant of the Su-30, which is a much more complex piece of kit. Heck, the Ethiopians fly Su-27s, they're pretty bog standard nowadays.

In any case, perhaps it's time for me to bow out of the air force and navy discussion and leave it to the experts. All I know is that the New Chinese MBTs (T-89, T98) would beat the hell out of the Taiwanese M48s.......

 

[Dare]

The source you cite gives 100, not 152 Su-30MKK in total, 76 air force, 24 navy.

"The PLA Air Force (PLAAF) acquired two batches of 76 Su-30MKKs between 2000 and 2003."
Emphasis on "two" and that's just til 2003.

I'm not sure how far they have progressed with the production of J-11s, but I doubt they are at this point capable of producing the engines, and may still be at the stage of just assembling Russian kits. I guess that's still pretty far from locally producing any variant of the Su-30, which is a much more complex piece of kit. Heck, the Ethiopians fly Su-27s, they're pretty bog standard nowadays.

In any case, perhaps it's time for me to bow out of the air force and navy discussion and leave it to the experts. All I know is that the New Chinese MBTs (T-89, T98) would beat the heck out of the Taiwanese M48s.......

Heheh, no doubt there, the hard part is getting them there and I can't say I'm an expert either, I'm just a pattern watcher.

 

[Britney Spears]

"The PLA Air Force (PLAAF) acquired two batches of 76 Su-30MKKs between 2000 and 2003."
Emphasis on "two" and that's just til 2003.

They mean 76 all together, not 76 each. See lower down on the page where they have a table of inventory. Each batch is 38 planes, that equips one air division.

 

[Zipper]

So what your saying Brit is that Taiwan as a majority of citizens WANTS to re-join China if conditions are right (no communism)?

Ok. I can see that, and understand to a point.

Can the same be said about Tibet I wonder?

And I wonder what the States would do if Taiwan began direct overtures to do just that? The naval power balance in the area would be seriously threatened and not to the US's advantage. We can only hope a different administration (ideology wise) will be in if that situation ever happens.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

So what your saying Brit is that Taiwan as a majority of citizens WANTS to re-join China if conditions are right (no communism)?

The Taiwanese are really just refugees from mainland China: they were followers of Chiang Kai-Shek, who was the ruler of China before the civil war ... they are really just different factions: would be like if there was a revolution in Canada and the current government was chased to Vancouver Island and remained there {I will avoid going off on an obvious tangent}.  The idea of an independent Taiwan is more of a second choice/compromise.  Moreover, there are very few (any?) native Taiwanese left: they are all "refugees" from the mainland.

Can the same be said about Tibet I wonder?

No, not even close: the Tibetans are a separate people and consider the Chinese as empirical rulers: they don't have any claim on China, they simply want independence.

 

[Britney Spears]

The idea of an independent Taiwan is more of a second choice/compromise.  Moreover, there are very few (any?) native Taiwanese left: they are all "refugees" from the mainland.

The idea of independance is gaining ground In Taiwan, as more and more of the older generation die off, and the majority of Taiwanese will be composed of youngsters who have never seen the Mainland. The current ruling party of Chen Shui Bian was a fairly radical pro-independence party, although they had to tone down their rhetoric to increase their mass appeal, and even then they are presently what we would call a minority goverment( with about 35% of the vote, IIRC). CSB probably would not have won the last election had not the ruling Nationalist party split it's own vote with two competing candidates.

Can the same be said about Tibet I wonder?

Another whole different kettle of fish entirely, and again one woefully misunderstood in the west. To kick things off, let me dispell one of the common bits of misinformation parroted by the western press, that " China invaded Tibet in 1949, forcing the Dalai Llama to flee".  Continually I am astounded as supposedly "experts" in the area make this statement. Has anyone ever seen a pre-1949 map of China that did not include Tibet as being Chinese?  While the Tibetans are not Chinese and have valid reasons for seeking  independence, Tibet itself has been under Chinese rule since the 1600s. The notion that this land of Brad Pitt Nirvana was somehow annexed by the evil communists in 1949 is pure Hollywood fantasy that a quick reading of any historical work would dispell, but that is obviously too much work for most of the hippies out there.

 

[Horse_Soldier]

Another whole different kettle of fish entirely, and again one woefully misunderstood in the west. To kick things off, let me dispell one of the common bits of misinformation parroted by the western press, that " China invaded Tibet in 1949, forcing the Dalai Llama to flee".   Continually I am astounded as supposedly "experts" in the area make this statement. Has anyone ever seen a pre-1949 map of China that did not include Tibet as being Chinese?   While the Tibetans are not Chinese and have valid reasons for seeking   independence, Tibet itself has been under Chinese rule since the 1600s. The notion that this land of Brad Pitt Nirvana was somehow annexed by the evil communists in 1949 is pure Hollywood fantasy that a quick reading of any historical work would dispell, but that is obviously too much work for most of the hippies out there.

And yet, all one has to do is a quick search on the internet:
http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/north_east_asia/tibet/history.htm

Of course, all that is not to say that China's record with respect to Tibet since the Communist take-over hasn't been anything short of atrocious, but then again, Han Chinese suffered from Mao Zedong's mad schemes just as badly.

 

[Dare]

"The PLA Air Force (PLAAF) acquired two batches of 76 Su-30MKKs between 2000 and 2003."
Emphasis on "two" and that's just til 2003.

They mean 76 all together, not 76 each. See lower down on the page where they have a table of inventory. Each batch is 38 planes, that equips one air division.

You're right. My bad.

 

[Dare]

So what your saying Brit is that Taiwan as a majority of citizens WANTS to re-join China if conditions are right (no communism)?

Ok. I can see that, and understand to a point.

Can the same be said about Tibet I wonder?

And I wonder what the States would do if Taiwan began direct overtures to do just that? The naval power balance in the area would be seriously threatened and not to the US's advantage. We can only hope a different administration (ideology wise) will be in if that situation ever happens.

Many Taiwanese are being fooled into believing that a reunion would be formed with Taiwan being the dominant partner. Unfortunately, I think such a reunion would end up looking a lot more like China's slow totalitarian takeover of Hong Kong. The last election was mostly split along this issue.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

common bits of misinformation parroted by the western press, that " China invaded Tibet in 1949, forcing the Dalai Llama to flee".  Continually I am astounded as supposedly "experts" in the area make this statement. Has anyone ever seen a pre-1949 map of China that did not include Tibet as being Chinese?  While the Tibetans are not Chinese and have valid reasons for seeking  independence, Tibet itself has been under Chinese rule since the 1600s. The notion that this land of Brad Pitt Nirvana was somehow annexed by the evil communists in 1949 is pure Hollywood fantasy that a quick reading of any historical work would dispell, but that is obviously too much work for most of the hippies out there.

I think this is a bit of an over-simplification: Tibet operated under suzerainty (almost entirely Chinese, but also under the British) and even had total autonomy for a few periods (although subject to numerous wars and border disputes) ... in any event, Tibet under Communist rule is nothing like anything it had previously experienced (to be fair to the Hollywood Hippies).

 

[a_majoor]

Another one of those "OOPS" moments for US intelligence:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050609-120336-4092r

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

Analysts missed Chinese buildup

By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published June 9, 2005

A highly classified intelligence report produced for the new director of national intelligence concludes that U.S. spy agencies failed to recognize several key military developments in China in the past decade, The Washington Times has learned.

    The report was created by several current and former intelligence officials and concludes that U.S. agencies missed more than a dozen Chinese military developments, according to officials familiar with the report.

    The report blames excessive secrecy on China's part for the failures, but critics say intelligence specialists are to blame for playing down or dismissing evidence of growing Chinese military capabilities.

    The report comes as the Bush administration appears to have become more critical of China's military buildup.

    Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said in Singapore over the weekend that China has hidden its defense spending and is expanding its missile forces despite facing no threats. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also expressed worries this week about China's expanding military capabilities.

    Among the failures highlighted in the study are:

    "¢China's development of a new long-range cruise missile.
    "¢The deployment of a new warship equipped with a stolen Chinese version of the U.S. Aegis battle management technology.
    "¢Deployment of a new attack submarine known as the Yuan class that was missed by U.S. intelligence until photos of the submarine appeared on the Internet.
    "¢Development of precision-guided munitions, including new air-to-ground missiles and new, more accurate warheads.
    "¢China's development of surface-to-surface missiles for targeting U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups.
    "¢The importation of advanced weaponry, including Russian submarines, warships and fighter-bombers.

    According to officials familiar with the intelligence report, the word "surprise" is used more than a dozen times to describe U.S. failures to anticipate or discover Chinese arms development.

    Many of the missed military developments will be contained in the Pentagon's annual report to Congress on the Chinese military, which was due out March 1 but delayed by interagency disputes over its contents.

    Critics of the study say the report unfairly blames intelligence collectors for not gathering solid information on the Chinese military and for failing to plant agents in the communist government.

    Instead, these officials said, the report looks like a bid to exonerate analysts within the close-knit fraternity of government China specialists, who for the past 10 years dismissed or played down intelligence showing that Beijing was engaged in a major military buildup.
    "This report conceals the efforts of dissenting analysts [in the intelligence community] who argued that China was a threat," one official said, adding that covering up the failure of intelligence analysts on China would prevent a major reorganization of the system.
    A former U.S. official said the report should help expose a "self-selected group" of specialists who fooled the U.S. government on China for 10 years.
    "This group's desire to have good relations with China has prevented them from highlighting how little they know and suppressing occasional evidence that China views the United States as its main enemy."

    The report has been sent to Thomas Fingar, a longtime intelligence analyst on China who was recently appointed by John D. Negroponte, the new director of national intelligence, as his office's top intelligence analyst.

    Mr. Negroponte has ordered a series of top-to-bottom reviews of U.S. intelligence capabilities in the aftermath of the critical report by the presidential commission headed by Judge Laurence Silberman and former Sen. Charles Robb, Virginia Democrat.

    According to the officials, the study was produced by a team of analysts for the intelligence contractor Centra Technologies.
    Spokesmen for the CIA and Mr. Negroponte declined to comment.

    Its main author is Robert Suettinger, a National Security Council staff member for China during the Clinton administration and the U.S. intelligence community's top China analyst until 1998. Mr. Suettinger is traveling outside the country and could not be reached for comment, a spokesman said.

    John Culver, a longtime CIA analyst on Asia, was the co-author.

    Among those who took part in the study were former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst Lonnie Henley, who critics say was among those who in the past had dismissed concerns about China's military in the past 10 years.

    Also participating in the study was John F. Corbett, a former Army intelligence analyst and attache who was a China policy-maker at the Pentagon during the Clinton administration.
   
Copyright © 2005 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.

The fact the report was written by a bunch of ex Clintonites might make it seem like this is a case of Bush bashing until you remember the time-line: Mr Clinton was President ten years ago.

China also has something for those who favor freedom of expression:

http://www.themoderatevoice.com/posts/1118362904.shtml

China Cracks Down -- On Blogs
by Joe Gandelman

What more of a sign do you need that weblogs are a feisty new medium that has become disturbing to The Powers The Be in governments everywhere than what's now going on in China - a crackdown on blogs:

    The Chinese government has announced plans to police web forums, chat rooms and blogs alongside other websites.

    Websites in China have long been required to be officially registered. The authorities are now determined that blogs should also be brought under state control.

    Press advocacy group Reporters without Borders said the initiative would "enable those in power to control online news and information much more effectively".

    Private bloggers must register the full identity of the person responsible for the sites, the Chinese Ministry of Information Industry (MII) said. Commercial publishers and advertisers can face fines of up to one million yuan if they fail to register. All blogs and websites must be registered by 30 June.

Question: could some of the recent coverage by blogs in China about the anti-Japanese riots - and suggestions that the riots were at the very LEAST enabled by the Chinese government - have had something to do with it? The BBC story also adds these details:

    "The internet has profited many people but it also has brought many problems, such as sex, violence and feudal superstitions and other harmful information that has seriously poisoned people's spirits," said a statement on the MII website, explaining why the new rules were necessary.

  It has developed a system which will monitor sites in real time and search each web address for its registration number. Any that are not registered will be reported back to the Ministry, the statement said.

    Blogs are often used in countries where freedom of speech is limited as a way of speaking out against the ruling power.

    The new rules could be devastating for bloggers who do not toe the Chinese Communist party line, said Reporters Without Borders.

    "Those who continue to publish under their real names on sites hosted in China will either have to avoid political subjects or just relay the Communist Party's propaganda," the organisation said.

    "The authorities hope to push the most outspoken online sites to migrate abroad where they will become inaccessible to those inside China because of the Chinese filtering systems," it added.

Because, believe it or not, there is what is effectively the Great Firewall Of China:

    Known as the Great Firewall, the filtering system used by the Chinese government is not entirely unbreachable; for every new restriction and technical door that it slams shut, the Chinese people find a hack, a workaround or an entirely new way of communicating.

    According to official figures, about 75% of sites have already complied with the new procedure.


Lesson for bloggers everywhere: just as governments of all kinds may wish to scrutinize these uncontrollable (of the right and left) pesky blogs, bloggers need to scrutinize the government. All the more reason for bloggers to take a hard-line on any form of government regulation on their freedoms in the United States.

 

[Britney Spears]

Heh, sorry, but the combination of "Washington Times" and "Bill Gertz" on top of anything tends to make my eyes glaze over. Bill Gertz might think of himself as an "expert" on this stuff but I'm pretty sure he's the only one.    Most of the other stuff is vague enough to have some element of thruth to it, but I call BS on this one:

"¢The deployment of a new warship equipped with a stolen Chinese version of the U.S. Aegis battle management technology.