Why The US Navy Should Fear China’s New Aircraft Carriers

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

I love the logic of “we’ve been running carriers for over 100 years while China has only been doing it for 20 so we are clearly better and more experienced”. With that logic, the British Navy is still the most powerful on the planet even though they barely have any functional ships.

[@aidanmacdougall9250]

Don't forget the Spanish and Portuguese! 😂🤣😂

[@luoeain2026]

Sadly so many ppl deeply beleive western propaganda and they dont realize it

[@jeebusk]

China had some epic navies in like 2000bc or something 😅

[@astahfirula]

I’ll go further, Carthaginians were by far the best sailors on the planet for over 300 years when they lost the battle of Ecnomus to the Romans that barely had any naval experience. This is the kind of hubris that topple’s down empires.

[@MrArthoz]

​@aidanmacdougall9250 you forgot the Mycenaean and Carthaginian 😃

[@gerroos5751]

Let us talk about rockets, China used rockets the first time in 1232 AD. That’s 797 years of experience. US should be afraid

[@carrotbrainYT]

😂😂😂

[@greybone777]

Yes, a country that can't make a car that they can sell in the real world makes great aircraft and ships.

[@Tyrant369]

@@greybone777china can’t sell a car world wide? Are you living under a rock or just incredibly stupid?

[@fluxtheory3136]

​@@greybone777 You're being extremely uncharitable to Ford and General Motors.

[@chrissyp930]

​@@fluxtheory3136 our shit actually works and isn't made with the lowest grade materials we can find unlike China. Kindly shut up, signed someone who works with both American and Chinese materials in manufacturing and actually know tf their talking about/isn't a CCP troll

[@luoeain2026]

I am tired of the argument that the Chinese army has no combat experience. It turns out that the asymmetric warfare experience of Western countries over the years has no effect in war (e.g., Russia-Ukraine conflict). How can you expect the experience gained from bombing guerrillas with only AKs and RPGs with million-dollar planes to be effective in a world war level battle?

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 China's last actual combat in war was a devistating defeat against Vietnam in 1979. The USA by all intentions completely obliterated the Vietnamese in the theater of war, where China was humiliated. The hell you talking about the USA has no experience? We took out Iraq in weeks in 04 in a conventional war, we ended the Syrian civil war in a matter of months in 17-18. And yeah Russia the second strongest nation is winning against our proxy, funny how it's our proxy and not us directly. Last time they USA by proxy fought Russia by proxy we won. I don't see how that has any correlation on China who has yet to even win a proxy conflict against another nation.

[@alvinbonny1562]

The last experience americans have against modern armies is basically Desert storm and Iraqi freedom. But the record goes on. With Panama, grenada Iran and more. China Latest conflict was a failed invasion of Vietnam in 1979. So yeah lot of people understimate them. The reality is none of that matter, when the war kick out it is the most resilient side who win. How much US is willing to lose against the Chinese, or how many chinese must die before they surrender.

[@huyckhl6074]

And where do they think experience can be gain from? If they are that afraid of not having war experience we would not be here to talk about it. China have 1.4 billion people. they have manpower to spare.

[@NovaViper-x7m]

​@@alvinbonny1562How much China is willing to lose against the US and how many Americans must die before they surrender. It sounds so different when flipped?😂

[@josephmalit5689]

It seems obvious that aircraft carriers cannot be used effectively in any setting where the enemy can plausibly strike back. See how scared the USN is of the Houthis. You can, however, use aircraft carriers against insurgents like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Since the US is committed to using low-tech terrorist proxies in its ongoing war against the rest of the world, it might be best to view the Chinese carriers as an anti-terrorist force, rather than as a force designed to counter the US Navy.

[@whiskey_tango_foxtrot__]

No man admits to polishing their torpedoes.

[@Kasgigz]

As an aeronautics engineer, I have to admit we do polish our missiles...

[@timspiker]

@@Kasgigz is that how they go up?

[@Kasgigz]

@@timspiker yes, red paint is also forbidden by international law so they don't go too fast you know

[@timspiker]

@@Kasgigz What about racing stripes?

[@Kasgigz]

@@timspiker considered hyper lethal and a cosmetic of mass destruction

[@natealter2141]

Why do Americans always go on about combat experience, but don't say anything when you ask them when the last time was they won a war?

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

Because the loss of any, was from playing guard dog which would eventually end, then either the North Vietnamese or Taliban took over.

[@prastagus3]

2003 Iraq war 2

[@MGarafano]

When was the last time the US military was actually allowed to fight a war? Well it wasn’t really a war but it was a proper ass whopping, ISIS under Trump. I wouldn’t allow profiteering and politics to blind you. Oh and the war in Iraq only lasted 21 days, with Afghanistan being 28 days… That is exactly how long both governments held out before crumbling, after that we installed a puppet government and was “invited” to stay as an ally. That’s actually how we got around the whole “only congress can declare war”, POTUS is allowed 90 consecutive days use of our military before he’s got to get congress to back it. If you can topple them within 90 days you never need permission…🤣😂🤣

[@ytsertd333]

Hollywood

[@TheIdiosyncraticMe-t3u]

@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes Well, the inability to wipe out the opposition in itself in the war is a sign of inability to win a war. You might not lose, but you didn't win either.

[@pyrophobia133]

like in Age of Empires, China's favorite strategy is forcing the opponent to tech up at a very high cost

[@Gunslinger832]

Nah nah that's America's strat that's how they beat USSR. China is just using it too which is great

[@brendon1689]

@@Eneias-q9m ah yes, genghis khan back from the dead is how the us failed the advance on the chinese border in the korean war, makes sense

[@jimmywang6779]

​@@Eneias-q9m Although I don't think you really know the game, in age of empires civs like slavs and poles are way better in collecting food, cheap tech is still chinese biggest advantage.

[@Lighten_H]

that's how soviet union fall

[@pyrophobia133]

@@Eneias-q9m shows how much you played the game

[@volvo245]

US is so experienced and OP in naval warfare they have to shoot their own planes down.

[@sonofjack6286]

Exactly. We're so far ahead of the enemy it's not even fair at some points. I heard a little while ago that DARPA was working on squeezing light, so our radars can work more efficiently, and without raising power consumption.

[@rickandbrandonshow]

You do know they had drones and missiles inbound while they were launching and within 30 seconds of launch the jet was hit while the ships were repelling the attack and something went wrong and they also hit the f-18. It happens to every military in every war. Russia and Ukraine have both shot their own planes down in this war

[@Ziegfried82]

LOL gotta admit that kinda stuff really damages the US military's aura of invincibility. I think a lot of Americans forget that the US military is not in fact invincible, and could be defeated by it's peers Russia and China. Back in the Cold War days Americans weren't so overconfident, but now? The USA has become delusional from the top down.

[@tylerlewis2766]

Nothing says OP like DEI incompetence in the armed forces. You should be getting your good goy award in the mail soon

[@goccha-xm2yv]

The have not been able to control the Red sea. But they're still on it😂

[@houseofhas9355]

The only carrier the US should worry about is the keyboard warrior carrier. We are winning in Ukraine. BlueSky said so.

[@BlueFire015]

Hey US got alot of Keyboard warriors as well soo i wouldnt sell urself short in that departement

[@RadicalFloat_95]

I actually genuinely agree with you ​@@BlueFire015

[@greybone777]

Who's we?

[@houseofhas9355]

We the Nafo army. 😂

[@Spartan-jg4bf]

@houseofhas9355 3 year, 3day special military operation 🤣🤣🤣

[@soldierz18]

China is the 1 shipbuilder in the world, so naturally they would eventually gain an advantage over the US in the long run. The US should have never outsourced its industry to other countries.

[@NJ-wb1cz]

How do you compete with a country that's larger than 3 times your size? Only by allying yourself with other countries

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 The US navy is nearly double the size. We don't count all our ships in our navy like China does, that would be like claiming every coast guard vessel as naval ships. Also don't just blindly trust China's numbers without proof.

[@Luke_Crmwl123]

Exactly

[@daseapickleofjustice7231]

@@NJ-wb1cz Americas problem is that it only has alliances with its minions who rely on America while China has proper allies

[@ctrlaltdebug]

@@NJ-wb1cz import more migrants to match their size lol.

[@WintersJim-ly9no]

As a Chinese, i clearly know why America Carriers don't dare to stay neat the mainland and the islands of South China Sea.After 2016 in Southe China Sea, The us has actually given up the first chain.The Pla Navy isn't all, there are still thousands of df missiles and PLAAF are waiting for US Carriers. So the general once said even US drive 10 Carriers in the South China Sea,they will never be back again.

[@yuugenr7549]

Qin Shi Huang approves 👍🏼

[@damonburroughs5283]

@@WintersJim-ly9no I do not glorify conflict or encourage it. Nothing is cut and dry , there are hundreds of defense and strike missiles in a carrier fleet . All quite capable of intercepting and returning fire. A battle would be catastrophic for both sides and many would die. I have Chinese friends and nobody wants conflict. I'm British and wish no ill health to Chinese people. On the contrary , during WW2, we defended you . There is no need for conflict. Tbh , with all this talk of traditional lands etc, I feel surprised China hasn't requested Manchuria back, there were important resources there, very beneficial to china. There are also other traditional lands annexed. Personally , I think, we the people, have no ill feelings towards one another. Taiwan by contrast is a small island , your brothers, they choose to lead life differently is all. A partnership in trade would be beneficial as opposed to hostilities unless people really crave bloodshed

[@dhjrbhuehveh]

I am Chinese and I don’t want to go to the battlefield. I care more about class conflict than conflict between nations. The state is just a weapon used by a group of people to strengthen themselves. Many people only remember the country but forget their own class.​@@damonburroughs5283

[@ajaykumarsingh702]

@@damonburroughs5283 The thing about any vessel is that it has a limited volume and capacity. That's just physics. This is why no matter how advance any ship out there, they can be overwhelmed very easily. Even a million ships cannot defend against Mainland China, because they will be against Trillions of missiles fielded across the entire continent.

[@TheLaidia]

@@damonburroughs5283Soviet Union defended PRC. Compared with Soviets, Brits did nothing.

[@John_Pace]

As to combat experience. I see the US has just now managed to shot down one of its F18 aircraft in the Red Sea..

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

Friendly Fire happens in a conflict when you’re under attack.

[@useryggfdcc]

​@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes Need a tissue?

[@sonofjack6286]

Well it was during a point where the Houthis threw a bunch of junk their way. Freak accidents can happen. The pilots survived, so all's good.

[@jorgebarriosmur]

@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes Embarrasing, but understandable

[@xhydrag0br203]

@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes IFF, the Houthis dont have aircraft

[@trblemayker5157]

Don't worry Tom Cruise will liberate the skies

[@rickandbrandonshow]

Fuck yeah🎉

[@jasonscorsese]

terror wrist your day is through !

[@k3llym0]

cuz now you have to answer too!

[@justonlyme6121]

He will liberate all the seamen

[@MetallicReg]

He will leave earth in his Scientology built space ship by then.

[@realspeed1944]

HistoryLegends always uploads the videos when my dinner is getting ready, I don't have to look for videos to watch while eating

[@Luke_Crmwl123]

Nice lol

[@PortlightInspections]

While the US can't get 3 aircraft carriers out of dock and into operation at anyone time anywhere. They couldn't even get a third operational to relieve the Eisenhower after 9 months of high intensity operation off the coasts of Yemen in the Red Sea.

[@OAGAMER-gen3]

Bro the what I did lol

[@christopherscott932]

It's 830 in the morning where I am where in the world are you?

[@2DC24]

Other side of the pond it's 17:44 rn

[@somdattsable5540]

The overconfidence of USA will become fatal for them one day !!!

[@Jershom-l4q]

They may learn their mistakes from Ukraine Ukraine believed in their own lies Too bad Ukraine too bad

[@damonburroughs5283]

Why does everything have to refer to conflict . Conflict would be a mess for the entire world

[@Jershom-l4q]

@@damonburroughs5283 sorry,I couldn't understand you Can you explain your phrase

[@damonburroughs5283]

@@Jershom-l4q that is unfortunate for you

[@Jershom-l4q]

@@damonburroughs5283 bruh

[@VictorAwodutire]

china and history legends two words i want to hear

[@ShadowReaper-pu2hx]

Um, those are three words. 🤓

[@VictorAwodutire]

@@ShadowReaper-pu2hx 🛀 whatever u say im just happy to watch

[@felipebarbosamedeiros4845]

Two words history legends

[@felipebarbosamedeiros4845]

Eheheh

[@MonkeyLiggaScrumptiousNan]

I just want to find my discord kitten that loves me for me type shit yk?

[@Dapicomp]

they said they've been building cars for over 100 years and now comes along the Chinese EV makers surpassing them on all aspects.

[@alihasanabdullah7586]

The Chinese have been using gunpowder since the 8th century. 1100 years of experience, surely they can never lose right?

[@Dapicomp]

@alihasanabdullah7586 exactly. that's why we know experiences count, but not 100 percent.

[@josebadia1493]

Well,your last statement is false.

[@WarAuthority]

@@josebadia1493 Having something doesn't mean you know how to use it to it's full effect. Just look at China's overall infrastructure and how often they try to save a buck. Tofu buildings and their overall thought process should give you an idea.

[@OrdoXenos1020]

​@@WarAuthority if China has tofu buildings then America needs to buy more tofu. American infrastructure is so bad in comparison.

[@Sourdoetoo]

Thanks!

[@丝鱿鱼]

Twenty years ago, the United States said that I had advanced equipment but you didn't; Twenty years later, the United States said I have practical experience but you don't; What are you planning to boast about in the next twenty years? 😂😂😂

[@ygibsoon9261]

America says we have diverse genders

[@stevencher9968]

Emma has 2 mums and China doesn't 😅

[@易陆-p6w]

american have more powerfull LGBT forever

[@jf7009]

somehow the things you wanted to say got lost in the translation from chinese to english.

[@Stierlitz-z2s]

​​@@jf7009If everyone understands it and you don't, what does that say about you?

[@VioletSilence]

Meanwhile Russian submarines just chilling nearby: "Dafak they doin' over there on the surface"

[@PortlightInspections]

While the US can't get 3 aircraft carriers out of dock and into operation at anyone time anywhere.

[@potassiumk5549]

​@PortlightInspections how many can Russia get out of dock?

[@ste9856]

More than F-35 confirmed combactive sorties

[@I.AM.ON.MY.WAY.]

@@potassiumk5549NONE🤣🤣🤣

[@azanudniy]

Yes, this type of carrier warfare has become obsolete with the invention of anti-ship missiles. However, it seems that only a war can prove this assumption. Just like World War II was necessary to demonstrate that battleships were no longer relevant.

[@adder88]

The US Navy doesn't need to be afraid of the Chinese Navy now. The next thing is that China will start building the Type 004 nuclear powered aircraft carrier, which is China's target carrier. No one knows how many will be built, which is worrying. Of course, we also know that China's shipbuilding capacity is 230 times that of the United States.

[@Betz23K]

there may be a reason Trump goes for Panama - above the financial terms carriers as HL said are fast-local power.projection or "rule the waves" - if China could for a limited time establish naval power in a region they could protect their "foreign investment bases" or neutralize the US "canon-boat"-options

[@threestans9096]

When China can build houses without tofu dreg, come find me

[@JHP-tp4gl]

@@threestans9096 When American children go to school without bulletproof plug plates ,come find me

[@Fred-sy5sg]

​@threestans9096, can we still find you in your mom basement eating Ramen?

[@keking2178]

​@@Betz23Kgreen land is not part of america 😂 who you think you are.

[@Imbrojeff2361]

Don't worry, our "6th Gen Aircraft" is only an aircraft model. The new 003 ship is only used for fishing. All of our advance technology is CGI or made with AI. China is still 1000 years behind the US in terms of technology, and has a long way to go in order to catch up to the west, especially to most powerful nation in the world, India, and the most powerful nation in the universe, South Korea.

[@davidleahy6141]

If the Chinese military have truly hypersonic missiles that the U.S Navy cannot intercept, that makes U.S Aircraft Carriers almost obsolete.

[@lld4369]

To China, they are. But to other countries, they are still very powerfull.

[@smthsmthsmthsmth]

Well, both china and us have nukes, which makes everything obsolete.

[@TheOnlyKingNat]

gonna save this video for my dinner

[@danishcossack4392]

Lol

[@DutchTunisian]

Bro exposed what i always do

[@Mr.Bobcat1776]

Hot dogs and beans?

[@ShadowReaper-pu2hx]

I’m saving it for before I go to sleep.

[@kiyembapatrick2138]

Bro stop exposing my behavior with history legends

[@Kuraimizu9152]

3:26 also, China has 2,000 years of warfare experience, they wrote the Art Of War. If we are going to bring the years experience, let's bring them fully.

[@Tate.TopG.]

Great point

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 and how many times has China been invaded and conquered? Because the USA got invaded in the war of 1812 and during the Mexican American war. Neither went well for our enemies, particularly Mexico who we annexed 55% of their territory after humiliating them by taking their capital.

[@tat3179]

@@tylerrobbins8311Should I remind you that you people spent 2 trillion dollars , thousands the lives of your soldiers and 20 years in order to replace the Taliban with….the Taliban? 😂

[@tylerrobbins8311]

@@tat3179 Should I remind you that one presidential order took out a Taliban cell with the push of a button. I don't think you realize how weak your strawman argument is.

[@nicholasbrown668]

​​​@@tat3179bro is coping hard also 2 trillion was the cost of the entire ME campaign not Afghanistan also we did replace the taliban with another government? not our fault that government gave up, we killed over 70k Taliban according to the taliban themselves compared to what? 2k Americans? and now Afghanistan is a shithole that its own people are leaving in droves

[@moggridge1]

Four aircraft carriers? That's a lot of Chinese seamen! 😮

[@tariqramadan1521]

They have a huge population

[@svaseriofficial6061]

I see what u did there xddd

[@mouroblox]

Oh nah​@@svaseriofficial6061

[@avus-kw2f213]

~ 10,000 to be precise

[@polybius666]

The US will try and swallow but will choke

[@Henry_Jones]

Fact-hypersonic missles have made aircraft carriers obsolete.

[@historylegends]

That's the topic of a future video 😏

[@hunterthompson6737]

aircraft carriers are all cool against isolated 3rd world countries that barely have an army , far harder to use them against a proper foe i guess.

[@jarrettpage4009]

Absolutely not, no sir

[@lorneiggulden7123]

. China also has supersonic torpedoes.

[@simple17226]

USA doesn't possess that either, definitely not in large numbers as they are still in an infancy state

[@yttean98]

What is this analysis, you did NOT even consider China's Rocket Force, to me it is the most formidable force that the US will encounter in case there is conflict.

[@lolasdm6959]

No, they will disrupt operations but aren't decisive

[@yttean98]

@@lolasdm6959 I disagree that the implementation of rocket force in the Pacific ocean will decide the direction and outcome of the battle. Just wait, if US launched the Pacific war because of Taiwan, just watch how the rocket force would be implemented, it would blow your mind.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@yttean98 There won't be a pacific war, Taiwan will fall without much of a fight. Rocket force isn't something unique to China, US has already deployed their own ballistic missiles, which can also be used for antiship. Rocket force munitions are very limited, they can disrupt operations, they aren't decisive.

[@yttean98]

@@lolasdm6959

[@祖宗-e5o]

@@lolasdm6959 you have a good dream

[@thehumus8688]

I think most people dont know, that Military Equipment is very Maintence heavy like US have 11 carrier, but only like 3 or 4 is operational/Battle ready at same time - the rest was undergoing repair and maintance basicly its a rotation UK have 2 carrier, but struggle to field both at same time. mean their operational readiness has serious problem China however, flexing that they dont have operational readiness problem with their Carrier Battlegroups - despite mere...20 year experience

[@thomasdorey3296]

Uk two one is pretty much parts cause they fcked up so bad n can't get parts for it n other one it in dock again cause they fcked up building is propulsion.

[@riflescientist1744]

It's pretty easy to have operation readiness when you only go within you own waters Also it's not 4 anymore it's 6 active now. We also just reopened the shipyard near me in new Orleans for more carriers and cruisers

[@medlogics.a.s.4410]

And what the hell are YOU doing in other countries' waters? And YOU accuse Chinese and Russian of being imperialist

[@captainbalderdash5412]

​@medlogics.a.s.4410 what? The US fleet doesn't illegally enter nation's waters without permission.

[@felipebarbosamedeiros4845]

True hahahaha

[@adrianariaratnam5817]

An excerpt : The story around China issuing USD-denominated sovereign bonds in Saudi Arabia is generating an enormous amount of buzz in China, and could potentially be immensely important. I strongly suspect it's a message to the upcoming Trump administration. Let me explain what seems to be going on. The first somewhat interesting aspect of it is that the bonds were oversubscribed by almost 20x (meaning $40+ billion in demand for $2 billion worth of bonds), which is far more demand than usual for USD sovereign bonds. Typically US Treasury auctions see oversubscription rate between 2x to 3x so there obviously seems to be very strong market appeal for China's dollar-denominated debt. The second interesting aspect is that the interest rate on the bonds was remarkably close to US Treasury rates (just 1-3 basis points higher, i.e. 0.01-0.03%), which means that China is now able to borrow money - in US dollars (!) - at virtually the same rate as the US government itself. That's the case for no other country in the world. As a benchmark, countries with the highest credit ratings (AAA) typically pay at least 10-20 basis points over US Treasuries in the rare instances when they issue USD bonds. The third interesting aspect is the venue itself for this bond sale: Saudi Arabia. This is unusual since sovereign bonds are typically issued in major financial centers, not in Riyadh. The choice of Saudi Arabia and the fact that the Saudis agreed to this is particularly significant given its historical role in the global dollar system, the so-called 'petrodollar' system which I don't need to explain... By issuing dollar bonds in Saudi Arabia that compete directly with US Treasuries, and getting essentially the same interest rate, China is demonstrating it can operate as an alternative manager of dollar liquidity right in the heart of the petrodollar system. For Saudi Arabia, which holds hundreds of billions in dollar reserves, this creates a new option for investing their dollars: they can invest it with the Chinese government instead of the US government. Read in illuminating detail at ; x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1859446480198828360 (Brilliant move by China)

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

At this point, there is no threat to China freezing these bonds or finding BS reasons not to honor them, a huge risk holding US assets has. This move is a direct assault on the US based financial system and the US can do nothing about it. It also gives China the ability to eat away at the demand for US treasuries, thus making the US have less options for borrowing money. China has huge dollar reserves as well. They have no need to borrow dollars so that clearly isn’t what they are attempting to accomplish with this move.

[@adrianariaratnam5817]

​@barnabusdoyle4930 Indeed. This is a trial run on an option (one of many being formulated) that is intended to weaken that stranglehold on the world financial economy by Washington. Look for further implements down the line.

[@亦如飞鸟]

美元是世界货币，大家都可以用，哈哈哈

[@GenghisX999]

Any coincidence that the Saudis also refused to renew security agreement with US?

[@LRRPFco52]

There is no Petro dollar. That's a simplistic view of US finance, which ignores all of the US-dominated global industries. The US is the biggest economy and the second largest exporter, but exports are only 15% of the US economy. Riyadh absolutely needs the US to refine its crude oil, whereas the US doesn't need a thing from Riyadh. The Chinese system would implode without US oil refining and exports, let alone the US Navy keeping the trade routes open for China.

[@NoPantsBaby]

What does 110 years of experience have to do with anything? They haven't actually engaged in any peer force match ups in over 100 years.

[@VIPER276]

Fr. not like anyone they fought against had the capability to shoot at them 😂

[@RambleOn07]

It's not like any of the guys who fought back then are still alive, much less in active service.

[@potassiumk5549]

110 year Aircraft carrier experience. Simple.

[@potassiumk5549]

​@VIPER276 because nukes exist, life isnt some kind of game where you prove yourself by challenging someone on equal footing.

[@ajstyles5704]

110 years of just upgraded machinery, not actually recalibrated or redesigned for war as we never had an actual full naval war even in WW2. Try to look for it, we barely have any records of proper movements and tactics compared to Brirain royal navy during the EIT empire. We have extremely useless Generals that easily are more corrupted than Mafias. 1 trillion for F35 ladies and gentleman, over a freaking trillion US dollars to make a shit fighter, we have AWACS that does the same freakjng thing, for longer operation time and longer range. 30 years our tanks barely improved and we still use jet engine for our abrams, look at the proxy war, they barely sent them forward because there is no point to ut, they can be seen with thermal 200 miles away, heat seekers loves the Abrams.

[@mnmnyi]

USA: "Emma has 2 moms." 😅 China: “subdue the enemy without fighting”

[@thesage4729]

and how does 110 years of experience help ; when a Kinzhal or an Oreshnik lands in the middle of your flight deck

[@George_5050]

I don't think Kinzhal or Oreshnik have terminal guidance for moving targets. If Russia was to sink an aircraft carrier, they'd probably use Zircon.

[@sirpatriarch8122]

Well, that is what you think. Russian missile designers think otherwise.

[@allthenewsordeath5772]

Do you know what a layered defense is? America has two rules, number one don’t touch our boats, number two don’t touch the oil.

[@kolviczd6885]

SShhhhhss.... Let them think they (US) is always the best!! Muricans are lousy, let them blabber whatever they want lol..!

[@Mercps]

Only if you guys can even build them in the first place

[@roymustang3247]

Both the US and China are developing technologies to counter each other's aircraft carriers, which, in the long run, could negate the entire purpose of having them.

[@AtticusKarpenter]

And Russia not have such amount of excessive money, so they just develop missiles to sink any ship, and not invest into carriers (and overall battle ships. Aside from Borei-class nuclear submarines ofc) at all

[@dejannincic9671]

@@AtticusKarpenter Missles even hypersonic ones can be intercepted by other missiles or point defence systems

[@jeebusk]

we will probably loose more in any fight, our missiles unusually cost more than their targets 😅

[@ajstyles5704]

​@@dejannincic9671you joking right? Yes it can be shot down, but this isnt a game, point and shoot dont work the same as it is in games. We may have targeting systems that are state of the art, but not everyyhing we have are fully upgraded and nit all have the computing speed to recalculate an object moving at hypersonic speed. It means the moment we detected them, not all our systems will try to stop it, and the sheer speed gives us less time to shoot them down. Did you see the video where they shot more than 12 and it hit the targets less than a minute? At that sheer speed, all points of defense will ve alerted and most like end up try to shoot down 1 or 2, and they cost much less than building, refuelling and maintain an aircraft carrier, so not only its a valuable target, its the best target for an expensive missiles, which surprisingly, it costs less than when we started making Tomahawks. We overspend in everything.

[@dejannincic9671]

@@ajstyles5704 Ever heard of progress? Tech will advance and the missiles will be countered its what always happens

[@eerieforest9188]

China needs to work on its submarine technology. Those are the most important naval deterrent in the modern battlefield and so far only Russia and the US have much of one.

[@Steelythestacker]

I think the UK, Sweden, Germany, and France might argue that.

[@shanegraham9077]

Iran has the acoustic signature of the US subs now. Got them in the Persian gulf based on videos.

[@shanegraham9077]

Plus konashenkov talked about a sub getting chased away with a particular displacement. Plus another African country forced a Izrealllii sub to surface a few years back.

[@foodparadise5792]

China made progress in hypersonic glide vehicles -- missiles, aircrafts the MD19 MD22 and MD25. It would be weird if they totally ignore the submarines....Chinese don't need to make a big fuss about their upcoming project to get funding from tax payers.....remain low profile is big thing in Chinese culture.

[@andrean2247]

You mean new silent nuclear-electric submarine. With battery can be used up to 10+ years They go EV way with subs. Try chinese EV. And feel the silence.

[@patrickholt2270]

The purpose of China's navy is purely defensive. They have no interest in bullying other countries in 3 oceans and 7 seas like the US navy is intended to. While China's ship-building industry vastly outstrips the US ship-building industry, their goal is just to augment their coastal missile forces to be able to secure their coastal waters and the South China Sea in general in the event of foreign aggression, such as with the evident US intentions to invade and annex China's Taiwan province as a US colony. So their navy doesn't have to be that huge, and can rely mostly on smaller carriers, because it is only intended to serve in an auxilliary capacity. What you should pay attention to is how small China's military budget still is, in comparison with the US and as percentage of their overall spending and economy.

[@jf7009]

China's Taiwan province? Don't you see that the Taiwanese choose independence from China? That they have become a democracy, while China is still stuck in a dictatorship? Taiwan is an independent nation, no province. Also how can you look at Chinese's aggressive behavior in the south chinese sea, trying to expand their territories by basically invading Japanese, Vietnamese, Filipino sea territories and say that they only try to defend themselves? To be honest sounds like you're some bot sent by your Winnie the Pooh leader.

[@ben-l8g2n]

$90k for a bag of screws. what can you build with $900billion?

[@rob6927]

Yeah, China has no interest in buying other countries, that's why it's bulying all of its neighbours 🤡🤦‍♂️

[@Broodjemetbeleg]

​@@ben-l8g2npaper tiger

[@伤-e1j]

确实，中国的军事预算只占总GPD的2%

[@TheRanger1302]

The key thing is production, members of congress and the west's political class think the US has some sort of advantage since its "the most powerful" without talking about the specifics in production and the ability to equip a force. Our ability to produce equipment has been non existent compared to WW2, that the ability to produce large numbers of guns, tanks, ships and munitions is even inefficient to our smaller military forces of today. It takes 8 years to produce ONE American carrier, and we hardly do anything to expand and simplify production. Yet we see China building new shipyards, building more factories, in turn, constructing a higher rate of production of equipment so they can keep supplying a force that would need that constant flow of supply. Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

[@Doxymeister]

This! Our much-vaunted sea superiority by 100 years over China's is tempered by the fact that about a third of our fleet is undergoing repairs and maintenance at a time, so we can't field them all at once. While at the same time, most of China's is almost brand-new, just fielded long enough to field test them, kind of shaking-out the kinks so to speak. We haven't added any new ship-building facilities in ages, have we?

[@TheRanger1302]

@ exactly, considering it takes so long to build ships, and then we don’t bother building them at all. These expansions to the military take a decade long. It’s not even worth the “superior” tech if we can’t build any of it. You can see it in cars on the road having a lot of expensive but not widely used and unnecessary tech, when a car that’s 30 years old does the exact same job.

[@DanR-kc1yt]

Spot on! The lack of investment in America's manufacturing capabilities over the last 40 years is really starting to become a problem that is getting harder to ignore. Seems like every shop I've worked in there's a bunch of guys getting ready to retire but very few able and willing to take their place.

[@LRRPFco52]

Weird that we have the 3 largest air forces in the world and a single F-16 can carry a heavier payload farther than a B17 of WWII. The current US military force structure can deliver more munitions on-target in a fraction of the time we did in the 1940s. Combat power is leveraged far better than the inefficiencies of the 1940s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. If we were to do Desert Storm again, the kill chain would have been accelerated and compressed into a much smaller window of time.

[@enriqued8401]

@@TheRanger1302 my dude we have money. You think if we offered someone a few billion to make something, it wouldn't get done? Remember we started WW2 without a tank, and outclassed in almost every other technology except for trucks and individual service rifles

[@ybeuhie]

Just five days ago, the Type 076 you mentioned was launched. At the same time, two sixth-generation aircraft were also displayed.

[@ZincFold]

After the U.S navy recently shot down their own F/A-18 in the Red Sea, I'm pretty sure the Chinese are shaking in their boots. 😂

[@JayTse-x7l]

Don’t forget the 2 destroyers rammed by freighters.

[@LocalBosnian-99]

"Ughh i need to do something but i have nothing to listen to while i wor-" HistoryLegends: "I. Was the knight in shining armour in your movie."

[@LyndonLaRoucheArchive]

Having served on an ammunition supply ship back during the cold war, we spent a lot of time conducting underway replenishments with carriers mainly. The ability to supply ships at sea while underway was a significant advantage the US had over the Soviets at the time. Logistics is that unheralded key component of warfare.

[@jorgebarriosmur]

Having served nowhere, and beeing barely able to swim, I would say that your opinion hugely owerweights mine, buy if I may, I would want to point out that the Chinese navy is not chalenging (yet) US-global naval dominance, wich would require, efectively, a logistic-chain that right now, only the US is able to deploy.........China seems to be targeting "only" a local superiority, not very far away from their coasts. The logistic-requirements for that task, although probably still brutal, are mostly only a fraction of what you need to dominate the seven seas.......

[@AbandonedMaine]

​@@jorgebarriosmurUltimately, this is over dominance of sea routes versus continental land based transportation. The exact reason the British manipulated everyone into both World Wars.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

​@@AbandonedMaine You make a good point. The Germans tried local superiority against the Brits prior to WWI and it didn't work. When push comes to shove, the superior navy is going to cut you off from a distance using trade routes. China, like Germany before, is heavily reliant on imports via sea lanes to survive. In any prolonged fight, starving them out will be the US' primary strategy.

[@AbandonedMaine]

@TheKiltedGerman At the time, the British Empire largely had global dominance through sea power and control over key choke points. The US developing the transcontinental railroad, our assistance in helping Russia develop their Trans-Siberia railroad and Germany.'s Berlin to Baghdad railway were correctly as dire threats leading up to Mackinder formulating the Heartland Theory after all the maneuvering going on in the Great Game of central Asia.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

@@AbandonedMaine Mackinder, haven't heard that name in a while.

[@ex0duzz]

Great video. You covered most of the relevant information relating to China's carriers, but I think one thing was missed. The Liaoning carrier had a major refurbishment from Feb 2023 - Feb 2024 and upgraded over last year, and afterwards during sea trials it was seen with mockups of J-35. Another aft elevator was added, along with another 2 weapons elevators also added, drastically improving sortie rates and capabilities. Before it was like 20 peak sorties a day, now it's like 37 sorties a day average, with a peak sortie rate of 48 a day being achieved. For comparison, the Type 002 Shandong averaged 47 sorties a day during the Oct 2023 deployment. So as a result of the major refurbishment on the Type 001 Liaoning(40,000 ton), both the overall capacity and efficiency in terms of sortie rates was drastically improved, bringing it closer to the capabilities of type 002 Shandong(60,000 ton) which china built from scratch as an improvement on the Liaoning which china had bought directly from Ukraine/Russia. This was the 2nd major refit for the Liaoning, the first one was in 2018 and lasted for 6 months. Now after the latest refurbishment in 2023-2024, the Type 001 Liaoning is estimated to have a capacity of 40 fixed wing aircraft(32 jets, 8 helicopters). Made up of mostly J-15's(including J-15D electronic warfare variant), but will likely also be fielding J-35 and various drones also as soon as they are commissioned. Most likely within the next 3-5 years. The Type 002 Shandong has a capacity of 44(36 jets, 8 helicopters). Same exact load out as Liaoning, just more capacity and higher sortie rate. The type 003 Fujian is reported to have a capacity of 50+. That would include 40~ or so fixed wing jets, mainly J-35 and J-15(including the electronic warfare variants), a couple KJ-600 AWACS planes, and 12~ helicopters, and probably also other smaller remotely piloted or autonomous drones, for use in loyal wingman role or highly contested high risk recon role as a part of long range kill chain, maybe for use with China's Land Based carrier killer missiles like DF-17/DF-21/DF-26 with hypersonic glide vehicle attached like DF-ZF. These will have like 5000km+ range. Don't forget China also has the type 075/076 LHD's. Perhaps the drones will be on those instead. China in late 2022 also produced a 2100 ton, unmanned, remotely controlled+autonomous seaborne drone carrier ship that can launch more smaller unmanned drones of various shapes and sizes for multitude of roles.. ie they can fly in the air, sail on the sea surface, and also underwater. Google Zhu Hai Yun for more info. China said it was for "marine scientific research and other observations" but the military uses are obvious. It can be an unmanned autonomous or remotely operated sea mine layer, it can be the first line of defense and also make up the final link in chinas 5,000km+ kill chain. Coupled with China's mass production and "overcapacity" in manufacturing electronics and drones(just see DJI alone, one Chinese company) and electric cars and everything else, and China's PPP and deep pockets and 4 times usas population and manpower, there is no way USA nor anyone can out produce China. So that leaves the question.. will usa blockade china on a global scale with the intent to destroy China completely like North Korea? I doubt it. That would basically be the same as USA declaring total war on China. China will never be defeated like that or go down quietly. USA cant even choke or blockade Russia or NK or Iran or Pakistan etc let alone China. China has already prepared for all that and diversified and China is actually self sufficient for everything. USA talks a big game about decoupling from China and bringing manufacturing back to USA, but China has already been doing that for 4-5 decades now and has already succeeded and is the world's factory. China is actually making money and it's economically feasible for China to do it and keep doing it, while usa will only bankrupt itself and destroy it's own companies by making them all leave China and move manufacturing back to USA and tariffing china 100% and sanction and banning China like the chip bans, Huawei bans, etc etc. China has already won and USA has lost that game decades ago. It's far too late for USA to try do some knee jerk 4 year plan like 100% tariffs and ban this and ban that lol. That will only speed up usas demise and China and global souths rise(BRICS+ etc). BRICS+ is already bigger % of global GDP than g7, and BRICS+ is only starting, with dozens of countries having applied and currently on the waiting list, including Turkey, Indonesia, Hungary, etc etc. Obviously China isn't going to be militarily fighting USA directly head on in the middle of the Pacific Ocean in some silly carrier group vs carrier group battle.. China wont be fighting militarily at all but if they are forced to defend themselves, it will still only ever be fighting under it's A2-AD umbrella, backed up by all its land based anti ship missiles. And by A2-AD umbrella, I mean china will only fighting 1000-2000 km from China's coast max.. as in a defensive war over Taiwan and the South China Seas. China has no reason to be fighting anywhere else nor does it have any intention to be directly fighting with USA to begin with. Time is on China's side, it doesn't need to use military force/violence as a means to overtake USA in everything(economy/technology/global influence etc). Ultimately, China will only fight to defend its sovereignty, ie Taiwan and SCS. So if China and USA ever fight, it will only ever happen with USA being the aggressor and thus USA will become a global pariah, with the whole world including the UN all supporting China. USAs own allies will be supporting China and will be sanctioning USA. They will all jump ship from USA to China if it happens. It will be like how USA took over from UK. USA and any of its vassals dumb enough to be part of such a war will end up like Japan/Germany in WW2. USA could not even beat China in 1950 in Korea when China had absolutely nothing, let alone today when it has everything, including nukes. Ultimately, USA would have to be suicidal to fight China under those conditions inside China's A2-AD umbrella, and to be honest I don't see it ever happening since being shared 1st with China or even number 2 is better than starting a nuclear ww3. Like I said.. if USA tries start ww3 and global nuclear war just because it can't tolerate no longer being the sole global hegemon and because it can't have "full spectrum dominance" even in East Asia and Taiwan/SCS, it will quickly lose all global support even from its own allies. Even from its most loyal vassals like Japan and SK, Philippines, or even Taiwan. they've all seen what happened to Ukraine, and how USA and EU/NATO all did nothing except watch Russia destroy Ukraine and take 1/3rd of its territory with no end in sight. You can tell just by the rate of Chinese procurement that China is not worried at all about USA and that it also shares my thoughts and is confident that USA won't/can't attack China, and if they try, they will just become a pariah state and hasten their decline/demise. If China wanted, it could easily pump out 5 carriers in 5 years, even 10 if it wanted to. Same with jets, ships, everything. China is spending only 1.x% of its GDP on military and USA and whole West already can't keep up. Instead china is building infrastructure like high speed rail, spending trillions on belt and road and building infrastructure all around the world, it's lending trillions to USA and Russia, etc etc. China isn't worried, it knows USA can't do anything. And if even USA can't do anything, no one can do anything. USA is trying to get others like Philippines or India or xinjiang or hong Kong or Taiwan or Tibet etc to all fight china but China has defeated them all and none of them want to take the bait. USA is trying to use them to hurt China but they are trying to use USA instead to hurt China. In the end none dare to fight china directly in any serious conflict. Just see Philippines. They try to annoy china but China just puts its foot down and water cannon ph navy, or boarded ph navy ship and confiscate their weapons, ram their ships etc, and USA is nowhere to be seen. No one dares to cross China's red lines like SCS and Taiwan because China will never back down from those disputes because that is a matter of national security, of sovereignty and is literally an existential threat to China like Ukraine is for Russia, and like Cuba/Mexico/Canada would be for USA if China and Russia were to put nukes there and build military bases all in close proximity and surrounding USA. In the end, time is on China's side. USA is only wasting all its time and money on military and endless wars and conflicts like Israel/Middle East, or even Russia/Ukraine which is useless in the great power competition vs China which is all about economy and technology and global influence. If anything that only helps China since USA pushed Russia straight into Chinas open arms, and also pushing whole global south and middle east and Islamic world towards China. USA has even lost all credibility in the liberal West and even with its own people by supporting and defending Israels continued genocide.

[@rh906]

TL-DR next time.

[@Lighten_H]

你也是中国人吗

[@霜月-b2z]

讲的非常好

[@TheRealChilly]

CCP BOT DETECTED

[@mehmetbozkurt3274]

Great rundown of what's actually been going on. Good read.

[@boxtears]

Let's be honest, neither side would deploy carriers in a Taiwan crisis. They're far too expensive and prestigious to trade in a peer-to-peer/near peer conflict. More likely, the carriers will be saved for their only real role in the modern age: bullying smaller countries with limited or nonexistent navies and surface-to-air capabilities.

[@armannstraughter3296]

Hm.

[@maliknadji4452]

Yes but now , the little nation have a drones naval

[@Broodjemetbeleg]

China wouldn't even need to, Taiwan is just off the shore, and any reinforcements coming from Guam would be sitting ducks.

[@themissingpeace7956]

In this day and age, I'm kind of skeptical of the usefulness of the U.S. Navy's multi-billion dollar aircraft carrier groups vs. hypersonic missiles...

[@johnoconnell270]

Considering the Houthis have kicked the American Navy out of the Red Sea, I would not put much hope in aircraft carriers, not with hypersonic missiles

[@Positron9101]

Another Nimitz class Super carrier, the USS Harry S. Truman might replace the USS Abraham Lincoln (the one in the Mediterranean), as the latter is reported to be in-bound towards Malaysia. The Houthis might have do things like confirm some form of Battle Damage Assessment before they can claim victory. They might be celebrating too soon, as many countries do not really appreciate their civilian merchant vessels being hit by the Houthis. If anything, what the US fleet is doing there is pretty much deterrence and selective strikes as the Houthis have been reported to have been targeting civilian shipping (even stated to be proud of what they (Houthis) do. Imagine the US went full force, just glassing all of Houthi controlled territory in Yemen by bombarding more than what the jets and bombers are already doing right now; that would be tragic yet the Houthis might play the victim card again.

[@user-THE_GREAT_RED_TSAR]

Houthi victim awwwww​@@Positron9101

[@unifieddynasty]

China might not have modern war experience, but they also didn't have it during the Sino-Japanese wars culminating in World War II. They still fought on for over a decade, and they learned.

[@kye4216]

With the devastation of modern weapons China couldn’t afford to get destroyed for a long time before learning.

[@unifieddynasty]

@@kye4216 With the devastation of modern weapons, the war would either be very restricted by design or there would be mutually assured destruction. This is not a problem for China exclusively.

[@marcusaetius9309]

What also has to be taken into consideration is that carriers are huge targets for long range missiles especially if they’re hypersonic 😬

[@ingslobodan]

Thanks

[@abyssmanur3965]

China has the right to defend itself.

[@LK-ui9rx]

From what?

[@you-to-beornot-to-be9629]

The US has Rambo, Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, so calm down tigers.... careful..... 🤣🤣🤣

[@williamvandegriendt92]

You forgot Mickey Mouse 😅

[@you-to-beornot-to-be9629]

@@smthsmthsmthsmth yet everywhere the US goes it gets its S kicked and if it can put up a fight its against the weak/vulnerable.... if US has all that and is all that then why doesn't join the Ukraine and fight like real men... after all, Russia only has shovels to fight with.... Russia is so weak... 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Strategy_Analysis]

Thanks for the video, Alex. No evidence yet of China building its 4th aircraft carrier. Also, I went to the Zhuhai Airshow and saw the new J-15T. As you say this is a significant advancement for the PLAN.

[@alexracoon4513]

You need to add the several hypersonic anti ships missiles from China designed to take out battle groups 1. DF-21D (Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile) DF-17 (Hypersonic Glide Vehicle) YJ-21 (Anti-Ship Cruise Missile) HY-3 and YJ-12 (Variants)

[@Salmon_Rush_Die]

What's that line about... Never commit a unit to the battlefield that you can't afford to lose.

[@Gunslinger832]

Bro in that case those things are just to show off

[@Lighten_H]

fall of Aircraft Carrier in unacceptable for every country

[@KatarinaP-u6r]

America's arrogance is their undoing.

[@_N3M3S1S]

And of course, the Chinese and Russians aren't arrogant whatsoever, are they?

[@Chisobhaneko]

@@_N3M3S1S nah China is very modest.. it’s in the eir Confucian culture from 3,000 years

[@_N3M3S1S]

@@Chisobhaneko Right… “With the virus we have won the war”… (China).

[@ragnarokws2670]

@@_N3M3S1S U guys cant even took down China with 7 allies back then. not even mention Vietnam and talibans which is U.S nightmares

[@_N3M3S1S]

@ 70 years ago isn’t a good reference when you’re speaking of your grandpa’s war… 😆 As for the Taliban, well Biden screwed that up, not the US Military.

[@elliskaranikolaou2550]

In 1904 the British were heavily assisting the Japanese with their navy and viewed using the Japanese geopolitically against the US as at the time they viewed the US a threat to the British Empire. By building Japan up they thought it would create trouble for US ambitions and protect their own interests. British input was essential for this Japanese victory against Russia.

[@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw]

The British also contributed aircraft, knowhow and training to the IJN after WW1 in helping them create carrier aviation. Which was hilarious as the IJN would chase the RN almost out of the Indian Ocean in WW2, with the RN fleet having to hide in African ports as its bases in Sri Lanka were now too vulnerable and British carriers woefully outclassed by their Japanese counterparts.

[@NovaViper-x7m]

The British and German. People forget that Germany was the main superpower back then. It was such a big power it challenged the world order twice and nearly won both times.

[@mariamdjama2698]

British cowards invented proxy warriors to secure their interests…. Fascinating

[@poorman2457]

The British never feared the Americans. They were very close to the people that took over America after the US civil war.

[@rh906]

That explains why the Japanese marching as stupidly as the British.

[@MukulKumar-pn1sk]

Nice to be a part of your headquarter💂

[@ltribley]

Your analysis is primarily based on WWII and Cold War strategy, NOT on the new generation of warfare Russia is fighting and China is preparing for. The US CANNOT SUSTAIN ANY KINECTIC WAR with CHINA FOR MORE THAN A FEW WEEKS before attrition takes its toll and whatever US Naval forces still flaoting would need to return to base for repair, weapons, and supplies. US Carriers. The US CANNOT DEPLOY 10 CARRIERS! It only haa suffient resources to deploy 4, at MOST 5. 1, they go into rotation for repair, maintenance. 2. They only have enough personnel to man 4, possibly 5 but will be short-handed. 3. The US Nacy has insufficient resources, like operational aircraft, missiles, munitions, supplies, at sea maintenance, to handle more than these 4 or 5. Attrition. Once the US, carrier task forces expend their munitions they HAVE TO RETURN TO BASE to resupply. There is only a supporting oiler for each task force. the task force MUST withdraw BEFORE running out of munitions, aircraft fuel etc. and will become very vulnerable not only at sea but also in port since EVERY port for refit and resupply IS IN RANGE of Chinese HYPERSONIC MISSILES and aircraft, ships, subs firing HYPERSONICS from STANDBACK! Note that China's MOBILE LAND-BASED HYPERSONIC MISSLE SYSTEMS COVER OUT TO THE SECOND ISLAND CHAIN INCLUDING GUAM, and West US staging bases in SINGAPORE and the Western region overall. China can lunch its HYPERSONIC CARRIER KILLERS (and ground based killers) from its land-based missile assests withriut using the Navy/Subs and Air Force. China's nuke subs are getting much better, new ones reportedly as quiet as the US boats (likley with Rissian support), but what's never reported is their fleet of Electric Boats and new Stealth Boats, multiples being build simultaneously! Tney are quieter than the US Nuke boats and can reach out past the 2nd island chain. To get close to China, the US subs must risk the shallows of the South Chian Sea where nuke boats have insufficient depth to perform combat maneuvers and can be easily identifed. They would be sitting ducks. Taiwan. Why would China sacrifice its limiited aircraft attacking Taiwan? It would likey follow Russia's lead and attack Tawian with its massive inventory if missiles and DRONES. Identify and take out Taiwan's limited air defense, then they can follow up with an air campaign as it necessitates. There are many other issues here, but remember China has the mosted advanced A2/AD ever recorded. PS - Russia and North Korea would be involved, particularly if Japan and South Korea participated. They would both be devasted.

[@Drake-mt5ml]

In the age of drones and hypersonic cruise missiles, is it worth spending billions building aircraft carriers?I don't think so.

[@Imperatorcf]

Sure it is, to carry unmanned aircraft😉

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

Carriers can easily launch missiles and unmanned craft from great range as well.

[@sonofjack6286]

It is still worth it. They are floating air bases. And also true hypersonics don't exist yet.

[@Ziegfried82]

China has a good use for them for it's Taiwan operation. But sure carriers are pointless for peer to peer warfare these days I'd agree with that.

[@TheKiltedGerman]

Anti-ship hypersonic missiles are completely untested against a moving carrier group. Neither the US nor China is going to bet everything on them working as advertised.

[@FreetOfficial]

us people fought so many civilians that they think they are unstoppable lol absolutely hilarious

[@tylerrobbins8311]

😂 when his the US military lost a war?

[@Arandompenguin227]

A F G H A N I S T A N

[@tat3179]

@@tylerrobbins83112021 if I recall correctly, when the US spent 20 years replacing the Taliban with the Taliban.

[@tylerrobbins8311]

@@tat3179 🤣 that's not losing a war. We effectively took over Afghanistan, held it for 20 years and abandoned it. That has nothing to do with our martial capabilities nor the theater of war. That was all political corruption in our senate, and that is a separate issue.

[@jokeychin]

@@tylerrobbins8311 😂So you're asking me to believe that the US spent trillions and wasted 20 years just to play a turn-based game?

[@marcusm663]

"The U.S. ranks 19th in the world in commercial shipbuilding, and we build less than 5 ships each year, while the PRC is building more than 1,700" - Ambassador Katherine Tai, USTR January 2025 Press Release.

[@KaiserOfKnowledge]

GUYS alex dropped another video!!! Its 2am in australia but fucking BOMBACLAAT gotta watch it rn

[@BornJune1984]

I'm in Sydney 😂

[@tntbomb50]

Haha in Albany 😂

[@mkodyglobalsouthsoldier]

Morning 😂 now So good morning

[@EZ-rs5zv]

China does not need aircraft carriers to attack Taiwan, they are 90 miles apart.

[@parsi2292]

Us navy has been defeated by yemen , it's beyond worries now😂

[@fridaynight3181]

US warships are there freely roaming around the Yemen coast. US navy is just chilling there

[@parsi2292]

@fridaynight3181 chilling?under ballistic and cruise missile attack, shooting down your own fighter as a party trick yeah sur buddy

[@fridaynight3181]

@@parsi2292 minor damage lmao. US literally produce thousands of them for each losses.

[@parsi2292]

@@fridaynight3181 right,a lizards tail grows back again,but I don't think it's head would be

[@user-THE_GREAT_RED_TSAR]

​@parsi2292 just get out your really a bot 😂😂

[@claudermiller]

All anyone has to do is look at how far China has advanced in rail, EVs and high tech to see their ability to develop the most powerful military. I'm 68. I have no trouble at all remembering when China was all bicycles.

[@kye4216]

Don’t believe everything you see on the internet

[@glorihol6803]

@@kye4216 same to you yankee boot licker

[@whiskey_tango_foxtrot__]

Aircraft Carriers may be obsolete now in a near peer war.

[@Kasgigz]

Hear me out : *UNDERWATER DRONES*

[@DRourk]

Absolutely.

[@morganwartman8507]

I wouldn’t say obsolete, just much less useful than they were 15-20 years ago

[@lorneiggulden7123]

​@@Kasgigz Supersonic torpedoes

[@АнтоДив]

​@@Kasgigz Ты прав.

[@thesaltycabbage]

I remember the US bragging when china got its first carrier that it will take them another 10 years to get fighters to launch from its deck but they managed it in 6 months

[@Lookismeditsss]

Gonna watch when i get back from work and wanna eat, just came here to say first although i was beat to it by far😅

[@grimhammer00]

Don’t hypersonics like the oreshnek make all sea power pointless?

[@crowrequiem3934]

no you need ships to project power regardless, but yes they become less effective in peer conflict

[@ronnyb9416]

Enlightening commentary. Learned a great deal about the Chinese carrier's and new landing support ships.

[@Jamesthechef0311]

The Navy needs to fear it's own missles as the shoot down their own planes

[@IdeI2StOnEd]

It means the missiles are working unlike S400. Blue on Blue ist tragic but happens nothing to make fun of here.

[@Archer89201]

Can't let the army take the lead in friendly fire kills , Patriots have shotdown Tornado IDS and Navy F-18 and almost killed and F-16 that shot HARM at the radar to save itself, Patriot added the F-16 to its kill tally by shooting down the first Ukrainian F-16 sent too.

[@pierredelecto7069]

I think our navy should be afraid of long range hypersonic missiles and remote operated speed boats filled with c4.

[@nookied3735]

I cant help but think that hypersonic missiles have made any surface vessels obsolete.

[@semicolon101]

Yeah im trying to find some more info on this

[@andraslibal]

The main issue is not that China has some aircraft carriers. Japan had some in 1941, better than the US, better pilots better planes, better torpedoes ...but they lacked the manufacturing capability to scale up their Navy. The US outproduced and out developed them. The question is, who can outproduce whom today and who can adapt and develop better?

[@spinnakerthegreat2612]

The US will fight an economic war against China, leave China fight proxies (Japan, Philippines, Taiwan). US will effect an oil embargo on China and collapse its economy within 2 years. It will switch China off from the global trade system and trigger mass unemployment in China. Didn’t work with Russia because Russia has a closed and small economy, has infinite resources. China does not. Export economies always lose wars (mainly trade wars).

[@jamarplunkett3283]

I do agree that it’s who can out produce whom. But, not in the sense of big expensive war machines, but rather comparably easier munitions. We have to look at it realistically. In any possible conflict between both nations, Chinas “military” Shipyards would be one of the very first targets striked. Limiting their ability to deploy new ships. Theirs been a study that talks about a hypothetical scenario in which both nations fight and how that the type of machinery used will mostly be the ones each nation has before the war. ( with replenishments of munitions). They go on to talk about how that technology has advanced so much, that hyper scalability ( especially the type akin to WW2) is no more. At the height of WW2 the U.S. was able to produce 3 ships a day, now China can only do that in a month. The U.S. should be focusing on production of its best munitions. Just imagine if the U.S. had 10,000 Jassm/Lrasm missiles with each one capable of taking out a destroyer. How much would Chinas “ship building capability” matter then? It’s hard comparing future conflicts with WW2 because it doesn’t really matter what type of machine you have like back then. But, rather what type of munitions you have.

[@hughmungus2760]

@@jamarplunkett3283 the US attacking chinese industry would result in relatiation attacks on the continental US by chinese ballistic missiles. China can very easily equip its ICBMs with Oreshnik style conventional MIRVs that would decimate the few facilities the US produces its munitions at. The US on the otherhand can't justifiably use nuclear weapons over a single non-nuclear ICBM strike.

[@andraslibal]

@@jamarplunkett3283 I saw some video on how (commercial) shipbuilding moved to China and that is a problem for US shipyards that only have orders from the military. That is a problem for the US - there is no robust industry that could switch to wartime production.

[@Archer89201]

Problem is the situation is reversed now with chinese shipbuilding dwarfing the US

[@jean-francoislebroch9171]

Nobody wants American seamen in the pacific

[@Stephen-bq4nq]

Nobody wants Chinese seaman in the Pacific

[@Bf26fge]

Everybody but China wants the USA there. The chinese have no friends since they bully their neighbors.

[@rh906]

Except when someone does something in their backyard, then they come screaming for seamen to cover them.

[@jollypolly1686]

Nobody except Japan, Taiwan, India, Philippines, Vietnam etc. In other words, everyone in the region that's been bullied by Chinese expansionist ambitions.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@jollypolly1686 The reason why NATO exists is because Russia has ambitions to conquer Europe. The reason why NATO equivalent against China never formed in Western Pacific, is because China is merely irredentist.

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

The type 076 is the most interesting naval vessel being built at the moment! Can't wait for the final product! Merry Christmas chap! Have enjoyed your channel very much this year!

[@derrickwanyonyi8691]

History legends is on a roll

[@Kiyoone]

Chyna pays him!!🤣😂Not the facts

[@Supple_Leopard]

Yea this video is dogshit lol this dude didn't show one video of them launching aircraft which is the whole issue with Chinese aircraft carriers lol a bunch of people who've never been in the Navy talking straight out of their ass

[@Ziegfried82]

@@Kiyoone China has some big problems with it's new carrier. It's navy is second rate at best. But the missile systems are what will deter the USA from daring to send any carriers near the Taiwan conflict zone once things pop off. It's why the US moved semiconductor manufacturing Stateside they know they won't win that conflict.

[@SigmaRulesEdit-g3v]

​@@Ziegfried82 and what about American navy that bravely shot its own F18 no no no the American air force can't even shoot a Chinese plane first determine the gender

[@SigmaRulesEdit-g3v]

​@@Kiyooneeven my dog disagrees with you and pities you

[@bradleyakulov3618]

2:15 "Tickle the American G-point"? You missed a good opportunity here, but we know what you meant.

[@ghostm4390]

Cant wait to see the showdown : "Aicraft carrier vs. Hypersonic missile" ...

[@YeokKooi]

How can you invade your own country i.e. Taiwan?

[@spitfire7482]

2:26 what is that Philippine island over there? It brings back some memories 👴🏻👨🏿‍🌾

[@xanderdylan5085]

You are very stupid

[@painfultruth1846]

Keep up the good work, you are one of few KZbinrs who are still reporting relatively unbiased on these topics

[@n3rdy11]

The US has 10 carriers only on paper, but in practice it already struggles to keep enough of them operational for the _global coverage_ US hegemony requires in "peace times". Case in point: For the last weeks the US has had no carrier coverage of the Middle East/Red Sea because the USS Abraham Lincoln strike group already pulled back from there before it's USS Harry S. Truman replacement arrived from Norway. Some claim this had to do with successful Houthi strikes on the USS Abraham Lincoln, one reason for sure is that the US Navy has a massive lack of oilers and personell. That's also why the US would struggle to actually deploy all 10 of it's carriers even if none of them are going through maintenance/modernization. This is a big handicap for the US in the case the conflict over Taiwan would go hot: Chiense carriers only need to act in support of the main forces from the mainland, they are not the main vector of Chinese force projection. While for the US their carrier strike groups are their main vector of force projection in the region because Okinawa is practically quite ways off and geographically not well located to defend Taiwan against mainland China.

[@Ziegfried82]

There is zero chance the US navy could operate anywhere near Taiwan at any time. Chinese missile systems would sink every single carrier fleet that got too close. There's also the issue of production: China can produce a lot more missiles than the US can.

[@JohnSmith-pu3zv]

@@Ziegfried82 Let's see what the US should do. Convince its allies to deploy medium-range ballistic missiles in Japan and South Korea; transform Starship into a LEO bomber to replace B-1b or B-52, or even B-2. But in reality, this is impossible because it will turn the traditional US military-industrial complex into a clown, and hundreds of billions of dollars of orders will be canceled. The biggest enemies of the US military are its deep government, and the second enemies are the US's seemingly close but distant allies.

[@lolasdm6959]

Chinese carriers are a part of area denial strategy, China don't need carriers against Taiwan

[@linkdiablo4476]

As long as i know usually only 50-60% ready because maintenance

[@tevlex3405]

I didn't know that aircraft carriers could be clean, the US carriers are always so dirty

[@Ching-Chong-Bing-Bongg]

That's because we actually use them instead of use them for propoganda.

[@tooters1728]

When your fleet has never seen a minute of combat, that tends to happen.

[@firasajoury7813]

​@@tooters1728 explain combat experience

[@nrabinov]

That's actually rust

[@TomDrez]

@@Ching-Chong-Bing-Bongg Yeah you use them since almost half a century, no problem at all

[@leighfoulkes7297]

Five years ago, you guys were going, "aircraft carriers have been made obsolete after hypersonic missiles have been invented."

I'm still in the school of thought that aircraft carriers are basically just giant targets in the age of satellites and long range anti-ship missiles. It's like the build up of battleships in the age of carriers, we are preparing to fight the last war, not the next one. Cheap drones for offense, nuclear subs for sea denial. Everything else feels pretty redundant against a peer adversary.

[@allthenewsordeath5772]

You’re forgetting about the importance of force projection, being able to project force anywhere in the world and support other operations is a massive advantage. Even if the aircraft carriers of the future are just drone hives, they would still serve that purpose.

[@whatswhite110]

你的兵力投射能力那么远吗？？航母是一个移动的小岛。

[@ska187]

It’s like the mercenary companies of old. They didn’t fight much either but just showing up with a force that could hurt you is enough for people to bend the knee and pay up. That’s how i see aircraft carriers

[@ChengsHardware]

Nah, relax USA, those are just fishing boats🤫

[@Isserson]

I thought he last carrier lost in battle was USNS Bismarck Sea, sunk on 21st of February 1945 off Iwo Jima. It was sunk by two Japanese kamikaze aircraft. And there is the sinking of USNS Card on May 2nd 1960 in the Port of Saigon by VietCong, although the vessel was no longer being used as an operational carrier but performed supply-carrying duties at the time.

[@Marmocet]

Aircraft carriers are nearing obsolescence if they're not already obsolete.

[@wolfswinkel8906]

The Tony Montana reference killed me 🤣

[@samuelmahmud1909]

Great video coverage 💯

[@LivinwithPat]

3:50 asia pacific front lol

[@sterben2064]

HistoryLegends is already in WW3 mood baby 😎

[@froman1813]

Imagine how a swarm of AI-controlled kamikaze drones clears planes and manpower on the decks of aircraft carriers, and then 2-3 precise strikes with torpedoes or missiles send millions of dollars to the bottom of the ocean. The only question is whose drones will arrive first.

[@ChidisSkaniukas]

Read about ww2 pacific carrier battles, and replace planes with drones, here your answer

[@drainscholar]

drone swarm vs multiple ships armed with CIWS that are designed to shoot down missiles. Would be able to make decent work out slower moving drones. Not saying that tactic wouldn’t work.

[@andreasl_fr2666]

Carriers allow you to project power / patrol / supply across the oceans. That is the main capability you build them for these days.

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

The main advantage China would have in any war with the US is fighting defensively. China would be able to launch thousands of long range missiles at any and every naval asset the US had in the region. It would be interesting to see America’s reaction to watching their aircraft carriers get destroyed on KZbin.

[@danielpetrucci8952]

US Aircraft Carriers are worth Billions of dollars that's why the USN does not send it's carrier strike groups to the Houthies

[@PrénomNomAlias]

Toujours aussi précis et intéressant ! Merci Alexandre !

[@SimonSeow]

US carriers won't dare to come close to the Taiwan strait with China's hypersonic missiles

[@gge7gge]

Dear friend, the information you provide in your video is very good, but I think the overall interpretation of the situation is totally wrong. All of China's military, naval and land preparations are not aimed at invading Taiwan, but rather at preventing the US from invading Taiwan. China has no need or intention to invade Taiwan. China intends, and will succeed, in reuniting Taiwan with mainland China in the same way that it reunited Hong Kong and Macau, peacefully without any invasion. When the Western capitalist system collapses and the Western Alliance (USA, EU, UK, Canada, New Zealand and their Asian members, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines [which will be the first to leave the alliance]) falls apart after NATO's defeat in Ukraine and the current and ensuing economic and political decline of the developed Western countries, Taiwan will no longer receive any help, neither economic, political, nor military, from the former Western Alliance and will be economically totally dependent on China, although it already is to a very large extent. It will be the Taiwanese themselves who will decide to reintegrate into mainland China, through democratic elections and through negotiations, which have been quietly underway for quite some time now in anticipation of the upcoming fall of the Western capitalist empire. As for the ability to invade and annex other sovereign countries, do not forget that the US has already invaded and annexed other countries or territories, such as Hawaii, much of Mexico or some Pacific islands, territories that are now considered part of the US. And they invaded and conquered them through the force of war, not through peaceful means. Given the US outrage over the Russian invasion of the Donbas in Ukraine, it would be nice if History Legends could make three videos on the history of the invasion of Hawaii, of the Mexican territories annexed by the US and of the Pacific islands that are now part of the US, in addition to those it controls with its military bases. I am sure they will be very interesting and informative videos. Thank you in advance.

[@alancrane9762]

ha, ha. Is this a CCP troll? China is so righteous that it "Liberated Tibet." CCP lecturing about history? What a joke.

[@mikeviard9086]

Toujours un plaisir, joyeux Noël.🇨🇵🌠

[@tomziom3642]

"taiwan" is not a country remember this is a Chiness province !

[@黄冠-s5k]

我们只不过是让美国也爱好和平😂

[@williamvandegriendt92]

❤❤

[@turnbilltales2433]

I would be curious to know about the defensive capabilities of these carriers as well as what long range missiles / hypersonics do to the calculus of this analysis

[@rzxyz-c4h]

Hypersonic missiles have an interesting effect: after entering a denser atmosphere, a plasma cloud forms around them that does not reflect radar waves, making the missile stealth!

[@twogenders]

Never mind that US media never brought up Korean War, where an poorly equipped light infanty army of PLA kicked US funded 26 nation strong UN fully mechanized army with air superiority, sea superiority, and land superiority from YaLu River all the way back to 38 parallel. But I guarantee that the instructors at West Point did.

[@Schurkie505]

Korea supported by China?

[@twogenders]

@@Schurkie505 Always has been and always will. Read up on Korean history.

[@Warp10x]

You mean when the US army mowed down so many PLA conscripts their guns got so hot they melted?

[@maximmatyunin9934]

Why would you ever want to fight against an army that just wants to liberate people

[@Marine0317]

@@maximmatyunin9934 You’re right and China is that country

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

That was the point of Vietnam : preventing reunification

[@Marine0317]

@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes what?

[@AdrianFahrenheitTepes]

@@Marine0317 The whole point of the American conflict in Vietnam was preventing the North from conquering the South. Conquest or liberation depends on perspective

[@Marine0317]

@ well we failed there.