New Military Equipment Revealed At WWII Parade

New Military Equipment Revealed At WWII ParadeNew military equipment was revealed during the September 3 military parade commemorating 70 years since the “victories of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japan and the World War against Fascism”. Chairman Xi Jinping, wife Peng Liyuan and various esteemed guests watched proceedings at Tiananmen Square, which saw over 500 pieces of military equipment and 200 aircraft on show, 84% for the first time, as well as displays from 10,000+ troops. China’s new missile “Dongfeng-21D”, nicknamed the “aircraft carrier killer”, also made its first appearance. The occasion made many netizens proud.

Source:
qq

Help us maintain a vibrant and dynamic discussion section that is accessible and enjoyable to the majority of our readers. Please review our Comment Policy »
  • Amused

    They should at least try this missile out before declaring it works one would think. I happen to know the location of an old beater carrier that can’t be used for anything more than hauling garbage AND which could be easily re-purposed for some live fire testing if they’re interested…

    • guest

      Yes, I keep on thinking that, does it work when its needed to. With the USA making advancements in laser weapons, in five or so years it could the carrier killer missile could be outdated. But the chances are a carrier couldn’t face a barrage of them or one carrying a nuclear payload, if it was able to.

      • David

        Carriers are protected by destroyers and guided missile cruisers. They carry the Phalanx anti-missile system as well as other long range anti-missile systems. I am nto saying the Dongfeng would not reach the target, but it would have to be very good to do so and I don’t think Chinese missile technology is more advanced than the Russians, Germans or British (which is what we test it against).

  • Foreign Devil

    Does the US have a military pageantry show and tell parade like this or do they prefer to keep their arsenal secret?

    • Alex Dương

      There’s no parade like this, but the arsenal isn’t 100% secret either.

    • mr.wiener

      That’s what discovery channel is for.

      • jaded

        There’s actually still life on this board eh? Thought the baby went out with the bathwater at the beginning of the year with this site

    • Jahar

      I’m sure they keep their top tech classified.

    • vonskippy

      @ Foreign Devil – Yes, it’s called the Middle East.

    • David

      They often participate in air and water shows (as do most western countries) but the premier show for military technology is in Paris. While only the most advanced stuff is kept under wraps. all technology that is used on the forward lines and in combat is pretty well known to any enemies we have (and our friends).

  • Zebadee

    Chinese military equipment is still about 30-35 years behind the United States and apart from the motor vehicle parts that are made by manufacturers in Europe, the “made in China” parts keep breaking down.
    And, a parade is an easy way to show how practiced and disciplined China’s military personnel are, but in reality, they are toy soldiers and would all die within half-an-hour in the event of a real war. Most of them would stand around looking bewildered without a clue until orders are issued after lunch.
    China’s military strategy still works on the premise that any foreign force will conduct a land invasion. But why would it? The whole of China’s military complex can be destroyed without one single foreign solider ever setting foot into the country. Any missile fired from China would be destroyed while still over Chinese air space. And China does not have the capacity to conduct any naval battles should it be stupid enough to think it can take the fight to the enemy. The United States has the support of most Asian nations who would rally together in the event of any conflict to send the Chinese navy to the bottom of the ocean. How successful would that dumb and heavy “carrier killer missile” be then?

    • Shyridan

      Dude the still have nukes.

    • James

      this is why china needs to improve their military to protect itself from these threats that you speak of.

      • Jahar

        Threats being anyone stronger than them? The US is no threat to China, unless China has expansionist ambitions.

        • James

          tell that to all the other countries US invaded

          • Jahar

            None of those countries were anywhere near the size of China. A war between China and the US would be on a scale unseen since WW2. You think they would jump into that unprovoked? if you even think for a second that there is any chance at all that the US is gonna invade China for any reason short of ending a war that they begin, then you must be mentally handicapped or completely, utterly brainwashed beyond the point of being able to have a rational human conversation.

          • James

            Now now let’s not get testy. You are off subject. US has invaded china before when China was weak. That’s why I’m supporting a strong military for China to protect itself and discourage those things.

          • Jahar

            The US invaded China? When?

          • James

            yes along with a bunch of other european powers.

          • Jahar

            Nice answer. Also, The US was never a European power. Is this really the best you can come up with?

          • James

            Thanks for the compliment. Never said it was. Is this really the best you can come up with?

          • Jahar

            You said The US and OTHER European powers. That implies that the US is a European power. So yeah, you did. But seriously, you’re saying that China has to defend itself from the US because of something that happened with this country didn’t even exist. And why did they invade? because the government was letting rebels kill foreigners. This is the kind of thing China has to defend itself for?

          • James

            And are you going to just ignore why they were killing foreigners and why did the whole thing start? YES MY RETARDED SHIT TALKING LITTLE FRIEND, IT’S BECAUSE OF FOREIGN INVASIONS. But it doesn’t matter. You are a nitpicking little bitch so I’m not going to argue with you. You obviously have a bias against China or are mentally handicapped yourself. China has a right to defend itself and discourage future aggression. Its military is still many times weaker than the USA’s and here you are talking shit about it out of your little asshole of a mouth. Everything that comes out of your mouth about China is shit.

            “Threats being anyone stronger than them? The US is no threat to China, unless China has expansionist ambitions.”

            WTF do you even mean by this? Is USA the only country in the world? Retarded simple statement like these leads me to believe you are a biased little piece of shit. Just admit it, you hate China and will probably be happy every time something bad happens to China. Well fuck you, you can go suck on a camel dick. If not, then you are just fucking stupid to expect a nation as big as China, or any nation, to not STRIVE for a strong defense. I don’t know exactly what you are arguing for but you are an idiot so I’m done with you, well I wouldn’t exactly say you are an idiot but you have half a brain missing and you never shut the fuck up and just and bitch and nag over and over. OK now again, I will tell you to fuck off and you can have the last word just like in the last argument. God I can’t believe I just wasted more time arguing with a little cunt like you because I know you are just going to reply with some other infuriatingly stupid argument. But go ahead, prove me right.

          • mr.wiener

            @james @jahar This comment was deleted not because I disagree with its content, but with its tone.
            Feel free to continue this conversation but please turn the agro and the aggression down from “11”.

          • Jahar

            I thought it was amusing.

          • Jahar

            You’re comment was deleted, so I’m replying here. name calling and insults is hardly a compelling argument. But yeah, every country has a right to defend itself. But can you rationally say you think there is a threat of american invasion? this isn’t the 1800’s, and a war like that would be on the same scale, if not greater, than ww2. For that to happen, China would have to start committing some pretty serious atrocities, or invade an American ally. But then that wouldn’t be using the military for defense.
            Also, maybe they don’t let you know this, but the US has spent the last 40 years trying to be friends with China. No one wants to fight China.

          • Alex Dương

            Also, maybe they don’t let you know this, but the US has spent the last 40 years trying to be friends with China.

            Take the recent case of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. For years, the U.S. government has told China that it needs to be a more responsible global player. But when China tried to establish an international financial institution, the U.S. government strongly opposed the idea and strongly discouraged all U.S. allies from joining. In the end, only Japan sided with the U.S. in flatly refusing to join.

            From a U.S. POV, what China does isn’t always friendly, but when they are trying to be a more responsible global player and they get pushback like this, a statement like yours doesn’t seem accurate.

          • Vance

            The US often does not join these international organizations. China is in competition with the US dollar. It’s ok. Economic competition makes us both stronger. I think the hesitance to join that thing has more to do with that. It is not an act of aggression towards China. Besides, we already complain about the big banks, why do we want an even bigger bank?

          • Alex Dương

            The U.S. didn’t have to join the AIIB. But what was the point of actively discouraging all our allies from joining?

          • Jahar

            That’s because you see this as China trying to be a responsible global player. I see this as them trying to push the US out. It’s not a bank they intend to work together with the others, but to compete against them. Why would the US want to join a bank that would compete with the bank they are already a major part of?

          • Alex Dương

            The U.S. did not have to join the AIIB. But it was more than just not joining; the U.S. actively discouraged all of its allies from joining too. That’s not friendly behavior.

            Also, arguably, a big reason the AIIB was founded was because China didn’t have commensurate voting rights at the IMF. There was a reform proposal back in 2010 to give China and other developing countries more voting rights, but Congress never approved it. Again, not friendly behavior.

          • Jahar

            Things have been changing the last few years. I have difficulty seeing anything the CCP does in a positive light. So I imagine it’s tougher for the US to either.

          • Alex Dương

            So your comment is not accurate. Again, when it came to the AIIB, only Japan “fell in line” with the U.S. The U.K., Germany, France, Australia, and South Korea – all strong U.S. allies – had no problems joining. Even countries that have serious disputes with China, like Vietnam, joined. If they didn’t have an issue with it, then maybe you are just being too biased here.

          • Jahar

            I can’t say I know all of the US’s reasons, and that of others, I can just share my opinion based on what I see. Personally, I think the US has finally realized that the PRC isn’t interested in being better, just in beating them, and that they have to start cutting their influence.

            I don’t think I’m being too biased at all, I just think everyone else gives the PRC way too much credit.

          • Alex Dương

            The AIIB may turn out to be a huge bust. And I concede that it may very well have been established for selfish reasons. My issue with your position is that I don’t think you are being fair here.

            You argued that the U.S. wasn’t going to join because it doesn’t want to undermine the IMF. Totally fair point. But for the last five years, Congress has refused to approve an IMF reform package which would have increased the voting shares of China, India, Brazil, etc. So if you view what China did negatively, what should they have done instead?

          • Jahar

            Good question. I can’t say Congress was smart in that situation, because it opened the door for this, but I don’t trust the CCP’s motives here. I also don’t know how necessary another bank is, and how important or necessary it is for those countries to have larger voting shares.

          • Alex Dương

            It’s fine to be skeptical and not to trust China here. It’s valid to say that there’s already the IMF, World Bank, and ADB, so there’s no need for the AIIB. But regarding your last point, think about it this way.

            China has been the 2nd largest economy in the world for some time now. Yet, its voting share at the IMF is only the 6th largest. Similarly, India is the 3rd largest economy after adjusting for purchasing power parity, and its IMF voting share is the 11th largest. For Brazil, it’s 7th / 14th.

            As a point of comparison, Canada is 15th / 9th. So Canada’s economy is smaller than the economies of China, India, and Brazil, but it has more voting shares than 2 of the 3. If you were Chinese, Indian, or Brazilian, would you be happy at that?

            If this were purely a pissing match between China and the U.S., I’d expect the AIIB member list to be very different. It may just have been China, Russia, and “pals.” But it wasn’t. Plenty of countries that have disputes with China or are concerned about China joined. I think that shows that many countries weren’t happy with the current situation or didn’t see this as a threat to the “existing order.”

          • Jahar

            That is a fair point, but I understand the other side of the argument as well. It’s not all about the size of the economy, is it? I would assume Canada has a considerably better track record of responsible international decision making than the 3 countries you’ve mentioned. I’d think they earned their voting rights. I would also guess that overall they’ve made a pretty substantial overall contribution. Again, if any of my money were involved, I would definitely prefer countries such as Canada making decisions as to how it would be spent.

          • Alex Dương

            I do want to emphasize that the other side of the argument here is really just the United States. Out of the entire G-20, only the U.S. legislature has not approved the 2010 IMF reform package. This doesn’t mean the argument is invalid; minority does not mean wrong. But your own country doesn’t have a problem with the 2010 reform. So I am a bit surprised that on this issue, you so readily agree with the U.S. position.

          • Jahar

            I’m not saying that I agree with it, just that I understand it. If that’s even what their argument was. You know congress, they may have just been trying to screw with Obama.
            Canada still tends to look at China the way (I think) the US used to, and the way the EU does. that over time, they will come around to our way of thinking, have rule of law, value human rights, and behave as an honest, civilized member of the global community. I know, in my heart of hearts, that as long as the PRC exists, this isn’t going to happen. And they aren’t going anywhere. The US knows this too.

          • Alex Dương

            Touché on Congress. Definitely not something we’ve been proud of lately.

            Ultimately, I think that the U.S. should pick and choose its fights more carefully. This didn’t seem like it was worth lobbying all the allies to go against it. For something else, like the South China Sea, hey, there’s already plenty of U.S. support in that area for U.S. involvement. Seems like there’s more to gain with less effort.

          • James

            human nature doesn’t change

    • vonskippy

      Yes, but China has a secret weapon. Like the 14th century castle warfare where the enemy would catapult corpses infected with the Black plague, China, will use their untested missiles to launch imitators of North Korea’s Fatty Kim onto US ships and territories. The horror will cause the US to immediately withdraw.

    • David

      This does not make them an adversary that can be ignored. Most people do not think the next war will be fought in a conventional sense (where the U.S. would have a large tactical advantage). Also, you would have to be crazy to do a land invasion of China. almost as bad as invading Russia.

  • Toasty

    So how much of this new equipment actually works? and how much of it is to con the people into thinking they have the strongest army?

    While watching the parade all I could think was, Only those with a weak mentality feel the need to show off and flex their muscles while the genuinely strong just sit back and watch with mild amusement.

    • hypebeast88

      Don’t think anyone could have said it better!

    • David

      The sad part is, I don’t think even the military commanders know how much faith they should have in their equipment or men. Real inspections (like the west does periodically and sometimes fail) is not done in the Chinese military. I believe all inspections are done at a local level by members of the same command. This is often ends with expected results instead of real results.

  • Andy Mc Crab

    The event was attended buy some 50 plus state members including the UN. The UK did not go as they stated they don’t believe in military parades to show off fancy toys so abstained from the farcical.

    • donscarletti

      One rapid but fairly sure guide to the social atmosphere of a country is the parade-step of its army. A military parade is really a kind of ritual dance, something like a ballet, expressing a certain philosophy of life. The goose-step, for instance, is one of the most horrible sights in the world, far more terrifying than a dive-bomber. It is simply an affirmation of naked power; contained in it, quite consciously and intentionally, is the vision of a boot crashing down on a face. Its ugliness is part of its essence, for what it is saying is ‘Yes, I am ugly, and you daren’t laugh at me’, like the bully who makes faces at his victim. Why is the goose-step not used in England? There are, heaven knows, plenty of army officers who would be only too glad to introduce some such thing. It is not used because the people in the street would laugh. Beyond a certain point, military display is only possible in countries where the common people dare not laugh at the army. The Italians adopted the goose-step at about the time when Italy passed definitely under German control, and, as one would expect, they do it less well than the Germans. The Vichy government, if it survives, is bound to introduce a stiffer parade-ground discipline into what is left of the French army. In the British army the drill is rigid and complicated, full of memories of the eighteenth century, but without definite swagger; the march is merely a formalized walk. It belongs to a society which is ruled by the sword, no doubt, but a sword which must never be taken out of the scabbard.

      -George Orwell, The Lion and the Unicorn

      • Andy Mc Crab

        That sir makes a lot of sense.

Personals @ chinaSMACK - Meet people, make friends, find lovers? Don't be so serious!»