|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
New Member |
I think it would be a worthy foe, China is spending the most in military spending 2nd only to the US of A. China's Navy is pretty much non-existant, it's infantry is ill-equiped with homebrew ak-47s, it's Tanks are made up of old US pattons and other old soviet tanks and it's airforce is late-soviet early-russian technology nothing the F-15 could handle easily.
|
||
|
Member |
Just where and why would we fight a war. There will not be a war with China unless they land on Taiwan.
|
|||
|
|
30 Day suspension. Disruptive, Inflammatory posting. Strobelvets |
No those are not AK's and that justly illustrates the point. We as Americans have no respect for the Chinese military. We think they are without technology and are far inferior to us in EVERY way. This is NOT the case. However, as Americans we do possess the skill and a more advanced military than they do. We would ultimately defeat them due to both of those factors. There will be an initial surprise at there resistance and thier ability to defend and even attack. But, that would soon be quelched by our ability to adapt and overcome. We would be triumphant!
|
|||
|
|
Indefinite suspension. Disruptive and disrespectful posts. 12/06/06 dmuhler |
I fail to see what is disruptive or inflammatory about Briborne's post?
|
|||
|
Member |
Yes we would defeat them, but we'd get broken nose, & by the way Hugo Chaves sold China some F-16's. I could see keeping a small peice of china, maybe from the southern coastline to 100 miles inland. You know, to help put a defenseive wall in front of Taiwan.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
Really interesting when you think about it. We in all our military might could not caoture and hold down the massive land and population of China. However they could not even in their must absurd dream land on any sort of US soil no matter if it be the mainland or a island in the pacific that no one cares about.
A issue with China might begin start in a war with North Korea. In which case the Chinese would be a little freaked out of at the idea of a US friendly ROK sitting right next to their borders. Much like China taking over Mexico or Canada. Or a they make a move on Taiwan a island they have had under their scopes for a long time. Seeking to destroy what remains of nationalist China and unite the country as one once and for all. Both of the above if really looked at are extermely unlikely. This is due to the fact that it would be economic suicide for one country to begin a war with the other. US needs cheap junk from China and China needs US to buy cheap junk. Regardless of who wins (which will most likely be the US in the end) the war will prove a major disaster for both parties which would surely last years or maybe even decades. To sum things the chances of any kind of conflict with China in the future in the current setting of things are very close to 0%. The only way the US and China will go to war is if we enter --- The Tom Clancy Zone --- which can and has happened in the past but it is still extermely unlikely... |
|||
|
|
Indefinite suspension. Disruptive and disrespectful posts. 12/06/06 dmuhler |
I have to disagree.
All China has to do is arrange a mutual defense treaty with Mexico and quietly slip a million troops with tanks and Migs into that country. Then they would lock down the Panama Canal and dare us to do anything about it while from San Antonio to San Francisco people hear the terrible sound of bugles in the mist. Bill Clinton is a traitor. History will expose him. I hope that isn't too inflammatory - I'd hate to be banned my second day here. |
|||
|
|
Member |
The Clinton's (emphasize plural) are traitors! |
|||
|
|
Member |
I agree, this is why I say we'd have a broken nose. We'd most likely come out victorious but with heavy loses. |
|||
|
Highly Experienced Member |
Very true, PRC already is the 2nd largest owner of US foriegn debt, all they have to do is stop buying our debt and our economy (and way of life goes down the crapper), let alone (heaven forbid) they actually call the debt due...... |
|||
|
|
Indefinite suspension. Disruptive and disrespectful posts. 12/06/06 dmuhler |
When Hiram Maxim was marketing his new machinegun he invited a Chinese official to come see a demo of it.
He chose a large tree and cut it off at the trunk by firing a line across it, then asked the Chinese official what he thought. "I can think of less expensive ways to chop down a tree." said the official, and left. Which is probably why when the Japanese attacked with machineguns the Chinese tried to stop them with war axes. China is the culture of Spectacular Failure - while the Great Wall may be the only man made structure visible from outer space, it failed to keep the Mongols out and bankrupted the dynasty that built it. Chinese history is redundant with such examples. It is their nature. As an engineer would say "Vast projects begun with half-vast ideas". The PRC is just another Chinese wetdream. That isn't to say there won't be war with the PRC - quite the contrary. The US needs to fortify its borders, and diversify its naval structure if the US is to survive that coming struggle. America will not endure without walls any longer than Sparta did. Eco-war is a two-edged sword. The Germans defeated it by devaluing the mark and using worthless money to pay off huge foreign debts. The Chinese know the same could be done to them and every other US creditor, which would destroy any influence China has with those creditors. I wouldn't be so quick to throw that weapon away, because it tends to tone down the natural aggressiveness of the Chinese. The Chinese may have invented paper money, but the West are the masters of its use. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Is the destruction of the dollar a realistic option in a Eco-war? No, the german did trye to use the inflation weapon do get rid of the war reparation and the result was....  Do you realy want to see the peso as hard currency in US.... |
|||
|
|
New Member |
http://www.sinodefence.com/
SOme of you guys have no respect for China. They are quickly becoming a worthy foe. Take a look at this site and you will be shocked. |
|||
|
|
Indefinite suspension. Disruptive and disrespectful posts. 12/06/06 dmuhler |
"When that giant awakes, the world will tremble."
Taking yourself unaided from Corsican ratbag to L'emperor is no mean feat even for the French. Of course he didn't explain what he meant. When the bell rings and you find yourself looking into your opponent's belly button, you better not tremble. Perhaps he meant if the Chinese ever learn to make commercials that make opponents tremble. In their fervor to get away from anything Imperial they appear to have thrown out SunTzu as well. Attack your enemy through his allies first. They've definitely lost the knack - all they impress are our enemies so far. Look what one bogus "loss" did to the American psyche. The Chinese have milennia of such experiences in their psyche, and each seems to be worse than the last. You can't leave that out of the equation, and there is no quicker way to be labelled fool by the silent than to be a Sinophile. China is a teeming mass of slaves dominated by a tiny minority of communists, who like the Black Prince resort to foreign glory to turn the masses' thoughts from revolt. The Chicoms are an opponent to be respected, and only a fool (as Alexander pointed out) goes to war with an opponent he doesn't respect. The fly in the ointment is that China is led by stupid communists who believe their own propaganda, and think they can whip the Yankees at baseball because they are Chinese and we are not. Crazy - deluded. That makes them triply dangerous. |
|||
|
|
Member |
The chances of a war with China increase over the century.
1. China has a long-term plan for a deep-water navy, and though there are persistent rumors of it developing an aircraft carrier, it is still a far cry from the USN. 2. The Chinese air force, or PLAAF, is acquiring and developing some rather decent aircraft. That alone does not make an air force.
3. The PLA is the world's largest army in terms of size with 2.25 million troops; about 500,000 of them in first-line divisions. The US is having a problem fielding a quarter-million troops in CENTCOM. We do not have a million-man army to tackle the PLA. If we mobilize to escalate the war, they can call in about 18.7 million total troops. The real question is what the scenario would be for the war. A Taiwanese gambit is the one most often thrown out by the US, but China still lacks sufficient naval and amphibious capabilities to conduct such hostilities, and would find its international sea lines of communications (SLOC) cut off, especially of its much-needed oil supply. As well, its commercial shipping would be seized and its economy hampered. China does not want or need a war with the US. It is more preparing for a regional war with either a) India, b) Vietnam, c) Korea or d) Taiwan. During the Cold War, the US was gleeful for the tense relations between China and India. However, as you can read, relations between the two countries has been easing over the present decade. Vietnam and China have had cordial relations since patching up after the 1979 conflict in 1999 and signing a formal treaty in July 2000. Korea and Taiwan remain more open issues. Yet China seems to be reluctant to involve itself in Korean affairs, and will involve itself only if dragged into the conflict. The Nautilus Institute does a fair job of covering the different scenarios for a future world. However, it fails to consider the possibility of a destructive lashing out by North Korea if it is going down in flames as per the 'Phoenix' scenario. Backed into a corner by the inernational community, North Korea might start a war seeing it had little left to lose. China might have to become involved as a peacekeeper, or more properly, peacemaker. Taiwan is always an issue, but even with Tom Clancy-like scenarios as written for the Asia Times predicting a 2006 invasion, the present relationship has a stability and equilibrium that will likely last decades. The problem with the scenario depicted is that even if China does invade Taiwan, it does not change the political alignment of the domestic populace. Nor would it escape world political ramifications. It is a nice wargame, but it forgets the facts of the long-term implications. Right now, China does not want a high risk gamble against Taiwan. It cannot afford an embarrassment if it loses. It wants a surity. It would prefer if Taiwan returns peacefully, even if that peaceful return might take most of a century, like Hong Kong. However, it might make plays for some of the islands that are part of Taiwan's territory, as described at the end of this article from the Jamestown Foundation. |
|||
|
|
Indefinite suspension. Disruptive and disrespectful posts. 12/06/06 dmuhler |
Light - not heat.
Why don't the Chicoms concentrate on improving their country as the Third Reich could have done but didn't? They are sitting on a ticking timebomb and know it. Like all the idiot offspring of Karl Marx they are driven to swim against the current of human nature. They can't wait for long because the poorly disguised oligarchy that is socialism needs to eat or die. This is why the wholesome urge for democracy is so brutally suppressed in China, because it is inimical to socialism and its need to utterly dominate the lives of the small. 60 million Chicoms know there will be no more luxury if they have to compete in an even game with a billion naturally entrepreneurial Chinese. Those 60 million are the problem, and the strategy should be to deal with them and not a billion of their captives. The Big Red Russian Mob put them in charge but no longer prop them up, and their days in power are numbered. They know this but delude themselves into thinking a military solution is the answer, coupled with Ecowar against all others (which brought about the destruction of the Imperial system). They refuse to learn. War with any of their immediate neighbors is not the answer. Absorption of Vietnam, South Korea and Taiwan would bring no relief. War with India would involve the Russians, the only real threat to mainland China, and is too risky. The Chinese want the Pacific as their Imperial pond but this would bring them into conflict with the US and Japan - but they have no choice. Still, the best path for them is in Sun Tzu; destroy your enemy without fighting him. The Japanese could be appeased and dealt with later, but not the US - appeasing us in the long run is hazardous to their ambitions. Therefore the only safe path for them (and the one they have been taking) is to involve the US in war with a Chinese proxy. No not North Korea - that would bring the fight to their turf and be hazardous. They already have a passive US presense there just off their coast, and don't want it to become actively hostile; an unsinkable aircraft carrier like Britain in WWII. There is only one model that fits the bill - Mexico. Start a US-Mexico war and intervene as we did in Korea. Achieve a stalemate; buy their withdrawal with a promise from us not to interfere with their ambitions in the Pacific. Deal with us after we have no presense there to stop them. It sounds just good enough to appeal to their erratic world view. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Wow what an idiot? Are you nuts? Ya that US Mexico is really going to happen...wink! Erratic world view? There dominating economically and they are quickly building a military that will match us within 10 years. Where do these skewed viewpoints come from. DO you not know anyone who has lived in China or been there recently. They have a good quality of life and a growing airline and tourist industry. These delusional mindsets in not taking China seriously and "hoping" that China doesnt want to attack Taiwan are what led us to be vulnerable to Al Qaeda for September 11. We knew of terrorism threats to the airlines but hoped that people wouldnt do that rather than preparing for the threat. The Bush administration has derailed many future weapons systems programs (C-17, F-35, F-22 etc.) to pay for the budget drain the Iraq War. We will only have 183 F-22's, maybe 1000 F-35's USAF, 680 for the US Navy/USMC total and only 180 C-17's to fight a future war with China. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
here let me a post a couple more specific links in case you didnt check out the site
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j10.asp http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/su30.asp http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/aircarrier/default.asp There preparing for us while were in Iraq hunting for needles in the hay stacks. That money should fo toward F-22's, missile defense, F-35's, new long range bombers, new submarines, an AMRAAM supplement, C-17's new tankers, etc. |
|||
|
|
Indefinite suspension. Disruptive and disrespectful posts. 12/06/06 dmuhler |
I assure you I am not an idiot, but you just took a major step toward idiot status with your remark. If you can't address my points without going ad hominem, welcome to my Ignore List. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Good, your delusional. Wake up, China is a force to be reckoned with and they will never be fully satisfied without Taiwan. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
.