US to build £8bn super base on Pacific island of Guam

thoughtone

Rising Star
Registered
source: Telegraph

The US is building an £8 billion super military base on the Pacific island of Guam in an attempt to contain China's military build-up.


GuamB1_1746604c.jpg


A B-1B Lancer takes off from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam in 2003 Photo: GETTY​


The expansion will include a dock for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, a missile defence system, live-fire training sites and the expansion of the island's airbase. It will be the largest investment in a military base in the western Pacific since the Second World War, and the biggest spend on naval infrastructure in decades.

However, Guam residents fear the build-up could hurt their ecosystem and tourism-dependent economy.

Estimates suggest that the island's population will rise by almost 50 per cent from its current 173,000 at the peak of construction. It will eventually house 19,000 Marines who will be relocated from the Japanese island of Okinawa, where the US force has become unpopular.

The US's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has said that this could trigger serious water shortages. The EPA said that dredging the harbour to allow an aircraft carrier to berth would damage 71 acres of pristine coral reefs.

The EPA's report said the build-up would "exacerbate existing substandard environmental conditions on Guam".

Local residents' concerns, however, have been sidelined by the US-China strategic competition. China has significantly expanded its fleet during the past decade, seeking to deter the US from intervening militarily in any future conflict over Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its own, and to project power across disputed territories in the gas and oil-rich South China Sea.

Beijing's naval build-up is also intended secure the sea lanes from the Middle East, from where China will import an estimated 70-80 per cent of its oil needs by 2035 supplies it fears US could choke in the event of a conflict.

China has therefore invested in what are called its "string of pearls" a network of bases strung along the Indian Ocean rim, like Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Gwadar in Pakistan and in developing a navy which can operate far from home.

Experts agree China does not currently have the capability to challenge US supremacy in the Pacific and Indian Ocean. "China has a large appetite", says Carl Ungerer, an analyst at Australian Strategic Policy Institute, "but it hasn't got enough teeth".

But China clearly intends to add bite to its naval arsenal. The country has acquired several modern Russian-made submarines and destroyers. Its shipyards are building new nuclear-powered submarines, as well as an aircraft carrier. There have also been reports that China is planning to test a new type of ballistic missile, the Dong Feng 21D, which would effectively render US carriers defenceless.

"China's charm offensive is over", says Ian Storey, an expert at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, "and its given way to what you might call an adolescent foreign policy. The country's flexing its muscles, letting us know it won't be pushed around".

The US is also investing another £126 million on upgrading infrastructure at the British-owned Indian Ocean atoll of Diego Garcia, 700 miles south of Sri Lanka.

Key among the upgrades at Diego Garcia, which are due for completion in 2013, will be the capability to repair a nuclear-powered guided-missile submarine which can carry up to 154 cruise missiles striking power equivalent to that of an entire US aircraft carrier battle group.

Diego Garcia, which has served as a launch-pad for air strikes on Iraq and Afghanistan, is already home to one third of what the US navy calls its Afloat Prepositioned Force equipment kept on standby to support military deployment anywhere in the world.
 
It's too late.

China is not going to allow the chance for world domination to slip from their hands again.
 
It's too late.

China is not going to allow the chance for world domination to slip from their hands again.


In four thousand years, China has no history of colonialism or military aggression. They will overtake us without firing one bullet!
 
In four thousand years, China has no history of colonialism or military aggression. They will overtake us without firing one bullet!

I dont understand why most people underestimate the Chinese...but unfortunately, I dont think Chinese domination will work out too well for black folks.
 
source: Telegraph

The US is building an £8 billion super military base on the Pacific island of Guam in an attempt to contain China's military build-up.


GuamB1_1746604c.jpg


A B-1B Lancer takes off from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam in 2003 Photo: GETTY[/CENTER]?SIZE]

The expansion will include a dock for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, a missile defence system, live-fire training sites and the expansion of the island's airbase. It will be the largest investment in a military base in the western Pacific since the Second World War, and the biggest spend on naval infrastructure in decades.

However, Guam residents fear the build-up could hurt their ecosystem and tourism-dependent economy.

Estimates suggest that the island's population will rise by almost 50 per cent from its current 173,000 at the peak of construction. It will eventually house 19,000 Marines who will be relocated from the Japanese island of Okinawa, where the US force has become unpopular.

The US's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has said that this could trigger serious water shortages. The EPA said that dredging the harbour to allow an aircraft carrier to berth would damage 71 acres of pristine coral reefs.

The EPA's report said the build-up would "exacerbate existing substandard environmental conditions on Guam".

Local residents' concerns, however, have been sidelined by the US-China strategic competition. China has significantly expanded its fleet during the past decade, seeking to deter the US from intervening militarily in any future conflict over Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its own, and to project power across disputed territories in the gas and oil-rich South China Sea.

Beijing's naval build-up is also intended secure the sea lanes from the Middle East, from where China will import an estimated 70-80 per cent of its oil needs by 2035 supplies it fears US could choke in the event of a conflict.

China has therefore invested in what are called its "string of pearls" a network of bases strung along the Indian Ocean rim, like Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Gwadar in Pakistan and in developing a navy which can operate far from home.

Experts agree China does not currently have the capability to challenge US supremacy in the Pacific and Indian Ocean. "China has a large appetite", says Carl Ungerer, an analyst at Australian Strategic Policy Institute, "but it hasn't got enough teeth".

But China clearly intends to add bite to its naval arsenal. The country has acquired several modern Russian-made submarines and destroyers. Its shipyards are building new nuclear-powered submarines, as well as an aircraft carrier. There have also been reports that China is planning to test a new type of ballistic missile, the Dong Feng 21D, which would effectively render US carriers defenceless.

"China's charm offensive is over", says Ian Storey, an expert at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, "and its given way to what you might call an adolescent foreign policy. The country's flexing its muscles, letting us know it won't be pushed around".

The US is also investing another £126 million on upgrading infrastructure at the British-owned Indian Ocean atoll of Diego Garcia, 700 miles south of Sri Lanka.

Key among the upgrades at Diego Garcia, which are due for completion in 2013, will be the capability to repair a nuclear-powered guided-missile submarine which can carry up to 154 cruise missiles striking power equivalent to that of an entire US aircraft carrier battle group.

Diego Garcia, which has served as a launch-pad for air strikes on Iraq and Afghanistan, is already home to one third of what the US navy calls its Afloat Prepositioned Force equipment kept on standby to support military deployment anywhere in the world.[/QUOTE]]? IS WHO GONNA PAY FOR IT.?THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA DAM FOR SURE AINT GONNA PAY FOR IT....AND THE US CANT PRINT 8 BILLION DOLLARS OUT OF THE SKY AND OUT OF NOWHERE....AND THE ARABIAN GULF COUNTRIES AINT LEDING MONEY TO AMERICAN BEGGARS.SO THE ULTIMATE ? IS.WHO GONNA PAY FOR ALL OF THAT.?
 
UK£8 billion = 12.8144 billion US dollars

For the USA to print out 12.8144 billion more dollars to fund a base on the other side of the world is insane. All this military/defense money could do wonderful things if used within the US instead. Talk about going broke.
 
Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 others advocate for defense cuts

Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 Others Advocate For Defense Cuts

The Department of Defense currently takes up almost 56% of all discretionary federal spending, and accounts for nearly 65% of the increase in annual discretionary spending levels since 2001. Much of this increase, of course, is attributable to direct war costs, but nearly 37% of discretionary spending growth falls under the “base” or “peacetime” military budget.

Years after the Soviet threat has disappeared, we continue to provide European and Asian nations with military protection through our nuclear umbrella and the troops stationed in our overseas military bases. Given the relative wealth of these countries, we should examine the extent of this burden that we continue to shoulder on our own dime.
 
Re: Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 others advocate for defense cuts

Frank said:
. . . we should examine the extent of this burden that we continue to shoulder on our own dime.

Thats a worthwhile endeavor. Another would be to remove, as much as possible, politics from the evaluation of the defense budget.

QueEx
 
Re: Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 others advocate for defense cuts

Thats a worthwhile endeavor. Another would be to remove, as much as possible, politics from the evaluation of the defense budget.

QueEx

Another would be to remove, as much as possible, politics from the evaluation of the defense budget.

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:
 
Re: Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 others advocate for defense cuts

So now you're receptive since Paul has is name on it?

now? I've been anti-war since I stepped in this board. It has nothin to do with Paul but his fellow representitives can benefit from his wisdom on foreign policy. Furthermore, I feel all this defense spending represents the largest form of corporate welfare.
 
Re: Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 others advocate for defense cuts

now? I've been anti-war since I stepped in this board. It has nothin to do with Paul but his fellow representitives can benefit from his wisdom on foreign policy. Furthermore, I feel all this defense spending represents the largest form of corporate welfare.

Since you went out of your way to post Paul's name. Liberals have been railing against this forever. Paul is supporting nothing new.
 
Re: Barney Frank, Ron Paul and 55 others advocate for defense cuts

<font size="5"><center>
US seeks to expand military presence in Asia</font size></center>



_48951918_009889013-1.jpg

Both China and the US have increased naval
drills in the Asian region




BBC
7 November 2010



US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has said the US wants a larger military
presence in Asia.

On his way to Australia for annual security talks, Mr Gates said closer ties
with Australia would help the US expand its role in South East Asia.

The US would focus on fighting piracy, improving counter-terrorism, disaster
aid and cyber-security, he said.

He said the US move was not to contain China, which is engaged in various
territorial disputes in the region.

Mr Gates said Washington had no plans for more bases in the region.

But he expressed hopes for increased co-operation on issues such as missile
defence and "space surveillance".

"We're looking at a number of different options," he said.

Concerns have intensified around the region since China published maps
earlier this year claiming the entire South China Sea as part of its territory.

But Mr Gates said: "This isn't about China at all."

"It is more about our relationships with the rest of Asia than it is about
China," he told reporters travelling with him.

A senior US defence official told reporters that the Pentagon is "looking at
how we can make sure our forces are not just oriented in north-east Asia,
but are looking down to south-east Asia and then into the Indian Ocean as
this part of the security environment becomes more important".


<font size="4">'Force for good'</font size>

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard said everyone hoped China could play
a larger role in regional co-operation.

"I think we will be talking about the geopolitics of our region, and that
means of course we'll be talking about the rise of China and as China rises,
what sort of force it is going to be in the world," she said.

"I believe we have a shared perspective with the United States that we
want China to be a force for good, strongly engaged in global and regional
architecture, strongly engaged in a rules-based framework."

She spoke of the benefits for Australia of closer military ties with the US.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is also visiting Australia.

"We have made the point to China, both privately and publicly, that there
does need to be transparency about China's military strategy," said
Australian Defence Minister Stephen Smith.

"Australia believes that China will emerge... to use the Chinese phrase, into
a harmonious environment. It will be a responsible international stakeholder.
And that's what we want to see," he added.

Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd said Australia would "welcome the
United States making greater use of our ports and our training facilities,
our test-firing ranges. That has been the case in decades past and will be
the case for decades in the future".

There is controversy in Australia on the idea of sharing bases, which could
mean more US soldiers present in the country.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11705355
 
This is very reminiscent to the period of time right before WWII. We're going to have another global conflict soon, might as well get your shit straight before somebody presses that shiny, red button.
 
Back
Top