Since the commissioning of China’s first aircraft carrier, gCaptain’s inbox has been flooded with questions about what it means for the U.S., China’s emerging naval sea power, and the rest of the world.
So what does it mean? I think this visualization pretty much speaks for itself.
Image via GlobalSecurity.org
After graduating the Catholic University of America in 2005 with a B.S.B.A. in Finance, Mike Schuler went on to Tahoe to help with the launch of gCaptain's sister site, UnofficialNetworks.com. In June of 2008 Mike joined gCaptain.com as the first full-time employee in charge of the day-to-day operations of gCaptain.com and Unofficial Networks, LLC.
Click HERE for gCaptain’s free daily newsletter.
lol all most laughable when people say the USA Navy is not as strong as it use to be.
The depiction of China's Carrier is wrong, it's actually not that big compared to US aircraft carriers!
The depiction of China's Carrier is wrong, it's actually not that big compared to US aircraft carriers!
wow, great visualization, and Mittens Romney & his neocon buddies would have the American people believe that Obama has "gutted national defense"- give me a break. At the same time, Obomber is moving the military into Australia to confront the Chinese? Just look at defense spending by nation and it tells the same story. The American people pay for the security for the whole globe!
There was a time not too long ago, when our country's wealth could SOMEWHAT justify such an international presence- particularly on the seas. But will we continue to pay an exorbitant percentage for intl order, as the globalists exempt themselves from taxation and move their profits offshore to emerging markets? Given how much crap we buy from China/the far east, they damn well should pick up the cost of patrolling intl shipping lanes and such. BUT NOOO, Romney and the neocons are obsessed with global hegemony, and selling Americans on military superiority for an empire that benefits the average individual less and less every day.
Think you either need to fact check or explain why you’re showing “USA” with about twice as many carriers as are actually active (11, I believe). Still a significant number, but…
Considering the amphibious assault ships… which are arguably smaller aircraft carriers, I believe it is about right.
Uh no, you fail. Amphibious ships have a totally different mission than aircraft carriers.
Wasp Class. If you wanna look it up. And one Tarawa class.
Its well known that in a super-power fight these aircraft carriers are useless. They have a half life of about 6-8 hours in a WW3 scenario. What this shows is the USA is good at building pseduo force projection tools to the tune of trillions.
your useless
Sen. Robert Taft Jr., R-Ohio, asked Admiral Hyman Rickover how long he thought the U.S. aircraft carriers would last in the war with the Soviet navy, which was largely a submarine navy.
Rickover’s answer, on the record in a hearing of the Armed Services Committee of the U.S. Senate, was, “About two days.” The committee, needless to say, went on to approve buying more carriers.
You’re a goof. If they showed the same graphic representing submarines, the U.S. and it’s allies would look comparable to the carriers. Guns or butter, baby, how do you want to spend your tax dollars?
At around $5 billion each.
I feel safe.
this is not big joke?
Left-winger’s and Paul-bots are a bunch comedians that don’t understand the real world.