US vs. China


50 Freak
March 26, 2005, 07:31 PM
Here's the scenario.

China and the US relations freeze overnight. It's obvious the two big kids on the block are going to fight. No nukes or biological weapons of any type are agreed upon by the US and China and will be enforced by Russia and the rest of the European Nations, who all by the way have decided to sit this one out.

So it's just the U.S. versus China.

pros: absolutely the best fighting force in the world. Best technology and the manufactoring capability to back it up.
cons: Not enough of us

pros: their military outnumber us 2 to 1 (some figures put it up to 4 to 1)
cons: their arms technology is outdated and nothing in comparison to ours but they are without a doubt the masters of duplicating technology.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies

China: 2.8 million in their military
US: 1.4 million in our military

If you enjoyed reading about "US vs. China" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 26, 2005, 07:37 PM
What are the Chinese going to do swim here? Our Navy would pound them to hell and back.

March 26, 2005, 07:46 PM
China: 2.8 million in their military

Carpet bomb China back into the stone age. :eek:


March 26, 2005, 07:54 PM
Yeah, conventional warfare and we'd pound 'em.

Problem is, in a few years the dollar won't be worth squat and you'll see even the tech jobs are in china. Our taxes will be higher than ever, and buy not much of anything. Their economy is booming and the war will be won by virtue of them sitting on a big stack o' cash.

The war with China is heating up and it won't be won or lost in the battlefield--it'll be lost at walmart. We'll go the way of France, but people will hate us worse.

You see, China simply has better allies than the American people--our politicians.

March 26, 2005, 07:55 PM
China doesn't have the infrastructure to support an overseas war.

As long as we don't try to invade mainland China, the US has it won.

30 cal slob
March 26, 2005, 08:00 PM
I'm more worried about China's burgeoning economic strength and influence, and what its military will do with all that wealth.

You want to know why oil prices are high?

China and India sucking up demand.

The U.S. will no longer have the fastest growing economy (as measured by GDP) will be China.

March 26, 2005, 08:27 PM
Denied our nukes, we'd lose that war I believe. We're overextended in the Mid East, we have very few allies (in fact, most of the world would love to see our ass kicked), and we're struggling with our logistical problems which are legion. The Chinese don't mind losing a million soldiers or so and we don't have them to spare. And something folks may or may not be aware of - a lot of parts in our missile systems *come* from China. How crazy is that?
I'm sorry to say that Taiwan, a country that truly desires Democracy, is doomed. We've pledged military support but at this point due to other commitments, we can't keep that promise.

March 26, 2005, 08:32 PM
I doubt we'd see a major conflict between the two nations.

They want American dollars, we want cheap goods. If that equasion changes then maybe.

Harry Paget Flashman
March 26, 2005, 08:38 PM
Co-opt them...Give every Chinese family a big screen TV and unlimited cable. In less than a generation the Communists will be out, their work ethic ruined and their moral fiber frayed. They'll be too busy watching Bay Watch and Friends re-runs to care about war.

Standing Wolf
March 26, 2005, 09:06 PM
So it's just the U.S. versus China.

Fortunately for all concerned, time is on our side, and communist China's, as well.

China isn't going to remain communist much longer. The communist system is rotten through and through. Vestiges of it may remain, but I think even those will fall apart. I believe the Chinese people will simply outgrow and outnumber their communist masters, and kick them out of their way. None of that's any way to fight a world war.

March 26, 2005, 09:39 PM
I can't see it happen. Most I can see is US giving Taiwan hardware, which will anger China, but I doubt it will push them to war with us.

That, and what the others have said about communist China

R.H. Lee
March 26, 2005, 09:49 PM
Ditto what Standing Wolf said. China is quickly becoming an industrialized nation. Its appetite for oil will increase sharply over the next two decades. That will be the catalyst leading to militarization. Then who knows what? In twenty years the U.S. will be another socialist state dominated and controlled by those who are now illegal immigrants.

March 26, 2005, 10:56 PM
I studied in China, and I have to say that though their economy is booming, it is way behind us economically. People see all of the "Made in China" labels and think that they are stronger than we are. They are not. They are terribly backwards. Get out of the major eastern cities and it looks like the twelfth century. If we held a war today, it would be lopsided, assuming no surprises like the Yalu crossing.

Fifty years ago, people were worried about another country outgrowing the US. It had growth rates greater than China does today, but behold, the Soviet Union, for all its growth, peeked and never really caught up. As Americans, we must concentrate on building our economy here. We must keep socialism at bay, and train our youth to be strong and independent.

Let's keep an eye on them, but make sure our economy is strong.

March 26, 2005, 11:06 PM

That was one of the most literate, thoughtful, informed, and concise posts I've ever read (and I've read thousands).


March 26, 2005, 11:14 PM
Thanks, Outbacker.

March 26, 2005, 11:48 PM
Paper comparisons would lead me to believe the both armies are fairly well matched. The Chinese have numerical superiority, but are at a technological disadvantage. The US lacks numbers, but technology helps a lot. The things to remember in an infantry war such as this come from history.
NEVER underestimate the enemy. Germany was guilty of this on several occasions. They had American troops surrounded in a city yet couldn't achieve victory. They thought the Americans would surrender and even gave them a chance to. The Germans never brought the full force of their artillery to bear and it cost them.
The Germans threw the Soviets deeper and deeper into Russia. The poor Soviets lost millions of men and women to the blitz. Germany kept fighting on and on until they were overextended. The Germans underestimated the will of the Soviets and overestimated their own chances. History would have shown them that Russia is too large to conquer in that fashion.

Fast forward 30 years to Vietnam. The US had a technologically and tactically superior force fighting a smaller army and guerilla forces. A lot of teh loss could be attributed to running the war from Washington, but fighting in those conditions was tough.
The greatest success came from using the same tactics against the Vietnamese. Instead of rolling in slow moving tanks and giving them ample time to run, you ambush and use fast moving squads. Kill em so they can't come back.

Fast Forward to hypothetical situation.
The US, remembering these things knows not to underestimate numerical superiority. Use the terrain to your advantage and don't forget airstrikes they can't counter. Don't chase them too deep into the country. China is a big country and you don't want to overstretch your supply lines. Take coastal areas before pushing inland.
Win popular support by leaving civilian freedoms intact as much as possible. This is where humanitarian aid should be spent. If you blow up a school, rebuild it.
Next, LEAVE NONE ALIVE! The Chinese have a history of being a very resilient people. If you leave communist forces alive, they could take over again and give you the same problems. Kill/remove them all!
Set up a Republic, not a democracy. Make sure they understand how rights work. They have had their rights restored to them, not given by the USA.

Teach them that they have always had these rights.

March 27, 2005, 12:01 AM
As an american who has lived in China before, is currently living in Asia, and as a US veteran who has fought in several wars, I can say IMHO that the US would get our assess kicked by China.

China not only has many. many more personnel in its military but also now has advanced weaponary.

The other reason is, look at how many in the US are turning against the war in Iraq, after only 1500 or so dead. Would the US stand behind a war when those numbers are 10x that or worse??? I can tell you this, from living in China, most Chinese think that if they loose 100,000 or more to take back Taiwan or if they were fighting us it would be an acceptable loss to them and they would still support it. I am afraid that would not happen in the USA.

America needs to take a serious looks at China in many area. I can tell you first hand, that China has their hands in all of asia. They are the ones behind much of the illegal logging and other environmental destruction throughout other parts of asia. Raping other parts of less developed asia, to build themseleves up. Alos, the Chinese are pouring out money to many other countries militarys, wining and dining their Generals and training their men. That is the case here in Cambodia. While America was asleep, China came in and is bascially taking over the Cambodian (and also Myanmar) military underneath the table. To China, they regard history, and look at themselves as the middle kingdom, and that all of Asia should one day be back under their control.

March 27, 2005, 01:28 AM
Why is it we spend our time creating enemies for ourselves? After the germans were gone, we created the soviet threat to justify the continuation of the military conflict, after the russians bowed out, we began looking elsewhere.

March 27, 2005, 01:52 AM
faustulus, something about freedom and eternal vigilance comes to mind....

March 27, 2005, 01:58 AM
The Soviets were around before the NAZI's.

Creating enemies seems to be a more recent pastime. The government seems to do it with its own citizens though.

March 27, 2005, 02:04 AM
The other reason is, look at how many in the US are turning against the war in Iraq, after only 1500 or so dead.

He's got a point. If we did go to war, it would probably be the American public that would lose the war for us.

March 27, 2005, 02:33 AM
It's inevitable the US enters war with China. It's natural the two biggest fighters on the block fight each other. Don't discount China's highly advanced anti-ship missles. Can enough launched missles overcome a carrier fleet's defenses?

I'm 50. I give even odds I'll see the war in my lifetime. We've had it good in this country a long time. Too long. People are trading away their rights. Wait until China sparks the Muslim terrorists. To counter bombings, we'll see 15% total population concealed carry as the terrorists attack America.

Don't discount China. I've talked to Korean war vets, who endured human wave assaults. They're resourseful, persistent people.

Taiwan will be gobbled up within five years. The US will be powerless to prevent it. The same fate will befall S. Korea, shortly after. I don't have great confidence the free world can defeat China, over the next two hundred years.

I volunteer for the guerilla warfare that will follow any attack upon home soil. I believe I can arm twenty people. America won't go easily. Grim times lay ahead. JMHO

March 27, 2005, 03:13 AM
Regardless of who we fight, we as a society, a people, a culture and a nation must have the will to fight. After seeing how our past and present enemies have treated our solders, all I can say is, when it is time to take the fight to them, forget the conventions and terminate them all. Give no quarter to any enemy combatant and make them into examples.

If the enemy decides to brutalize civilans on our soil, let them. For when we capture the enemy, I am sure we can find ways to exact very clear and expressive ways of punishment and retribution.

Those who wish to turn belly up to the enemy will get what they deserve. Those who fight and die will at least die with freedom and liberty.

I don't think it would be a good idea to take the opposing country. Rather, bomb it into rubble and leave it.

I grant that the country with the strongest economy may win an economic war, but the country and people with the strongest will to fight and die in their defense will be the winner.

March 27, 2005, 03:57 AM
This is a war with no winners. China can not invade and hold America. The US can not invade and hold China. In both cases, the countries have plenty of land and many people willing to fight off the foreigners. If you think the Chinese people would accept American soldiers with open arms, then you would be sadly mistaken.

As of right now, the only conflict that can arise between China and the US is if China invades Taiwan. When that happens (because it will) it would be foolish for the US to intervene by itself.

The economy is booming in China right now and communist China is not the same as communist Russia. They're experimenting with their own version with a capitalistic take on the economy. There is a rapidly growing middle class in China. Just look at the auto sales over there. Oil prices today can not be completly pinned down on China and Indias growing demand. Besides, the largest consumers is the US and our morbid fascination with gas guzzling SUVs.

With time, China will have the same military technology as any EU country or the US. Just because China is going to be the next big kid on the block does not ensure a war. The only way I can forsee an international coalition against China is if they invade another country (other than Taiwan). To me a good comparison to China and Taiwan is North vs. South in our own civil war. I doubt US would have stayed idly by if the confederates still claimed Florida. Even today, people still aren't over the civil war even though it has been well over a hundred years!

A little off topic /rant off

March 27, 2005, 04:06 AM
The only way that China is in a possition to attack our forces is if WE go over there. They have no ability to project conventional forces overseas. By default we can't really LOSE the war because we could always just return back to our country safe from any counter-attack. We might fail to conquer China but, that is not the same thing. Really, I don't think its likely since there is no pay-off for either country to go to war.

March 27, 2005, 04:09 AM
Me and the fat ninjas will hold em off, thats what the 2nd is all about


March 27, 2005, 07:35 AM
We would have major problems,Back in WW2 our main strength was the ability to turn out massive amounts of equipment. Many of the auto plants were making military goods. Now we are closing the US plants and tearing them down.
As for " We have better technology, Back in the first Iraq war we needed more flat screen monitors for one of our systems (not sure if it was for the Patriot missles or something else). We were not able to get them . Why not? Our supplier was in Japan and they declared themselves nuetral and would not supply war materials.
If they would not sell for a war in Iraq they sure as hell wont sell for a war against their neighbor who can launch a missile attack in seconds .
Our greed for cheap labor is more apt to be our Achilles heel than the dependance on foreign oil.
Don't forget they have the ability to launch manned spacecraft now, a bit more sophisticated than launching long range missiles. Guess what, Our communucation companies helped advance that too. They contracted the Chinese space industry (Red Army) to send our tv satellites into orbit because they would do it cheaper than NASA.
We have given them all the technology they need to cause us major problems

March 27, 2005, 07:55 AM
I agree that loss of manufacturing capability in the US is going to be a major problem when we get into a conflict with China.

And that conflict will eventually come, the Chinese just arent ready yet. In 20 yrs, they will be industrialized enough to do whatever they want to whoever they want, us included.

March 27, 2005, 08:01 AM
Any military conflict between the USA and China can be expected to focus on three areas:

1. Naval and aeronautical combat, ranging across the Pacific Ocean and trans-Polar routes;

2. Peripheral military conflict, involving "hot spots" such as Taiwan, the Koreas, etc.;

3. The formation of "blocs" in the region (which has already happened, and which the Chinese are making strenuous - and sometimes successful - efforts to undermine).

The naval and aeronautical combat is predictable. There is no contiguous land border between our nations, so the "primary combat zone" will involve air and sea forces. At first glance, the Chinese navy and air force are far weaker than the US equivalents: but their forces are powerful enough to isolate and control a particular zone or area (e.g. the Taiwan Straits), which is more than enough to give them a local advantage for the time they need to accomplish a military objective. They're also developing a serious blue-water naval capability in terms of submarines, their first aircraft-carriers, etc. They're probably 20 to 25 years away from being able to seriously project seapower in the way that the US Navy now does, but it's coming.

Regional conflicts are also obvious. Taiwan is a case in point. The US is legally obligated to defend Taiwan, but how? If we send in a couple of carrier groups, China's next step will be to declare that any nation that provides basing facilities to such a fleet will be regarded as a co-belligerent of the USA and an enemy of China. What price Japan's continuing to allow us basing facilities under such conditions? Do you think South Korea will give us such facilities if the Chinese promise a five-million-man army moving south through North Korea to confront them on land? I didn't think so... Also, the Chinese have acquired the technology necessary to build relatively advanced anti-ship missiles. At the moment, this is largely 1980's-level technology, but they're buying more up-to-date stuff all the time, and stealing all they can from the US and Europe in the way of technology to help them update what they've got. Strength in numbers is in their favor. Sure, we have good anti-missile systems, that can knock down any individual missile, or small group of missiles, that they can fire at us: but what if they launch 500 or 1,000 of them at once? Even if we knock down 95% of a 1,000-missile strike (an almost impossibly high level of efficiency, BTW), that still leaves 50 missiles that will penetrate our defences and take out some or all of our ships - and a carrier is a big, vulnerable target. Also, their new submarines are much quieter and harder to locate than their earlier, noisier Soviet-based designs. It will be harder to stop them slipping a submarine or two into range of our fleet, particularly if this happens in a synchronized attack with missiles, aircraft, etc.

Bear in mind, too, that the use of weapons of mass destruction would be politically counter-productive for the USA. If we did so, we'd be portrayed to the world as monsters, bent on eliminating third-world opposition to our superpower status. Many nations and peoples would buy into this.

The formation of power "blocs" in the region dates back to ASEAN in the 1950's. However, the Chinese have been working hard to undermine US influence in the region, which took a heavy knock after Vietnam and has never fully recovered. Unstable, undemocratic regimes all across the region are in Beijing's back pocket - Burma, Cambodia, etc. are all well-known examples. So-called "Maoist rebels" in Nepal are alleged to be front organizations for Chinese expansionism. The Chinese are also training and equipping many of the military forces in SE Asia. With their growing influence, they can at least neutralize much of the support the US would look to gain from countries there, even if they don't attract direct support for themselves.

Our most effective counter to Chinese efforts would be economic - blockade their imports and exports, strangle their industries, etc. However, this depends on other nations honoring the blockade: and with Russia's economy in trouble, think of how much they could make serving as a back door to the Chinese! Also, many other countries are economically dependent on trade with China, and won't automatically dance to the US tune on this issue.

I believe that our saving grace in the growing political and economic (and potentially military) conflict with China can be found in only one country - India. The Indian population is growing faster than China's, and will soon surpass it in absolute numbers. The Indians are paranoid about Chinese expansionism, and have already fought one war with them in the 1960's (where they were soundly beaten). I think that India will be making more and more attempts to combat Chinese political influence in the region, and that in the future, they will have to serve as a regional counterweight to the Chinese.

A very interesting couple of decades lie ahead...

March 27, 2005, 10:01 AM
Destroy every bit of shipping they have, flatten all shipyards and seaports, blow all the dams inside the country, and then isolate them on that continent...we can do it right now, but in 20 years? Maybe not.

Dave Markowitz
March 27, 2005, 10:10 AM
While I don't discount the military threat posed to the US by the PRC, consider this: If China and the US go to war, China's economy will probably collapse in very short order. We are by far China's biggest trading partner. If the bullets start flying then that will come to a complete halt. Carrying on a war without a functional economy to sustain it will be impossible.

It would do a real number on the US economy as well, and quite possibly cause a recession/depression. However, because the US economy is less centralized I believe it is more adaptable than China's.

IMO, of course.

Bear Gulch
March 27, 2005, 10:12 AM
Don't forget that those eastern European countries (the old USSR) will know that once the Chicoms are done with us they're next. I see a new lend lease program and a war on two fronts to wear them down.

March 27, 2005, 10:28 AM
Just about the only way that China and the US will come into conflict is over this:

At this time, it might as well be a moonshot for the Chinese to cross that strait in force. The US is about three generations ahead in naval power and on the cusp of four if they perfect their electromagnetic rail guns for fleet deployment in the next handful of years.

The US Navy is apparently working towards a fleet of minimally crewed fighting vessels that carry about double the firepower of those of the preceeding generation. That's been the trend in surface ships other than carriers for awhile now.

Since China v. US would likely be a sea battle without much, if any land battle, (kind of a Falklands campaign on a massive scale if that,) I like our chances on that kind of fight over the next fifty years.

The more important thing is that it will likely never happen. Once China sheds the vestigies of Communism, the flashpoint of Taiwan will fade as an issue and I would expect some kind of peaceful solution to the situation.

A far more likely war in the next fifty years is perhaps China versus India over something we can't even anticipate due to regional rivalry if nothing else.

March 27, 2005, 11:01 AM
It's inevitable the US enters war with China. It's natural the two biggest fighters on the block fight each other.

For fifty years, people said the same thing about the US and The Soviet Union.

Fortunately for all of us, that war never occurred. There is, and let me say this emphatically, NO WAY TO WIN A NUCLEAR EXCHANGE. Your "victory" is ashes in your mouth, with your own cities leveled, your own infrastructure destroyed, and millions and millions dead.

Some people seem eager for this to happen between the US and China. War between these two countries is NOT necessary and, with a little forethought and diplomacy, can easily be avoided. If we avoided war with the Soviets, for fifty years, though we had no economic ties with them, surely we can avoid war with our biggest trading partner?

All that trade we're doing with China? That's the free market at work. There are enough libertarians running around here that that should come as no suprise. Americans want $18.00 an hour to work in a factory, for eight hours. A Chinese guy will do it for $2.00 a day, work 14 hours, and be happy he has a job.

...Much like the US was around the turn of the 20th century, with immigrants working in dangerous factories, for unGodly long hours, and living in near-squalor. But their hard work paid off. Each generation's lives were better than the previous, and a hundred years later we have one of the highest standards of living in the world. The US has poor, but the percentage of those people that are STILL poor ten years later is very, very low.

The free market can be a ***** sometimes, guys. It means things like outsourcing, losing jobs at home, etc. But the only alternative is a command economy, or at least a controlled economy, and any credible economist will tell you that that simply won't work.

Taiwan needn't become an issue. And here's why. The Old Guard Communists in China are a dying breed; they're being replaced by a newer generation that doesn't want China to fall into chaos and disarray like Russia has.

China is, very slowly, liberalizing. Technology is aiding this; despite their attempts, the Chinese Government can't control the internet, and literally millions of Chinese students are living in the US now, studying here, taking in our way of life, and breathing the free air.

You think these kids are going to go back to China and become hard line communists? These kids are the future leaders of that country.

In any case, for all of China's liberalization, Taiwan's government seems to be going in the opposite direction, becoming more hard line. Let us be clear; Taiwan is NOT a "free country" by our standards. It's not a totalitarian regime, but it's now Wyoming, either.

Eventually, I predict that the two will meet in the middle and reunite peacably. Part of the Chinese worldview is that there is only one China, and one Chinese people. This hasn't always been exactly true, and isn't now, but it's part of their cultural equivalent to our "manifest destiny".

In the end, economics will win out over militarism, if we all let it. People want nice cars, computers, air conditioned homes, and good schools for their kids. They don't want missiles falling into their cities and ships burning off the coast.

America must, of course, remain strong, and vigilant. We needn't have a humongous Army (though for the love of Pete if you're going to engage in two simultaneous overseas campaigns PLEASE make sure the Army is large enough first), but should have a MODERN ONE. A state of the art Navy and Air Force should be maintained as well.

With this as a deterrent, good diplomacy, and free trade, war with China should be easily avoided.

But perhaps not. I hope so, though.

March 27, 2005, 12:33 PM
Stupid question, but China does have nukes, right? I know there are only a few countries, but I can't remember if China is one of them.

March 27, 2005, 01:46 PM
I think it is misleading to say we were never in a war with the USSR. We did not fight their soldiers directly very often, but we lost tens of thousands of soldiers in conflicts with the USSR's puppet states.

We spent more money preparing to fight the USSR than we did on World War II.

China will not want to fight us directly any more than we want to fight them. But when they decide to roll into some surrounding country in 20 years, what can we do to stop them? Nuke them? I don't think we will for fear that they would do the same to us.

March 27, 2005, 02:15 PM
Surely, China has nukes. What they don't have, is a way to deliver them much further than Japan.

Fortunately, when Clinton was in office and that knucklehead Richardson (NM gov now?) was watching the gate, the Chinese stole the MIRV (W-22--i think?) design tech and you can bet they'll have no tech problem carpet bombing with nukes anywhere in the world.

I don't understand the cajones of some of those people that have screwed up on such a massive scale and rather than slink away and hide, they continue to speak out like they know what's going on.

But yeah, as someone said, the US loves her cheap labor. When speak out (and rightly so, of course) that slavery was a dark spot in our history, yet defend the need for illegals for cheap labor and the desire for low cost goods--built by people working for a slave's wages and living in squalor.

The more things change...

Fred Fuller
March 27, 2005, 03:58 PM
Take a look at the table at .

No need for them to fire a shot... or drop a bomb. We are burying ourselves in debt, selling our birthright for a cheap teevee set, hollowing out our industrial base, job market, economy, and society. The Chinese are waiting patiently, they are the world's past masters of patience. Much of the touted Chinese industrialization is actually owned by the state or the military.

Do look at the whole table, follow the link above to get to it. But note the changes on the snippet I appended here. Note the change in total debt held by foreigners from Dec'04 to Jan'05 ($24.4 billion dollars increase). Note the shift in levels from the Japanese to the Caribbean Banking Centers. Things are going on out there, big things involving billions of dollars, and not all wars involve bombs and bullets...



(in billions of dollars)


2005 2004

Japan 701.6 711.8
Mainland China 194.5 193.8
United Kingdom 163.0 163.7
Caribbean Banking Centers 2/ 92.5 69.5

Grand Totals 1960.3 1935.9

Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board
March 15, 2005
1/ Estimated foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury marketable and nonmarketable bills, bonds and notes are based on Treasury Foreign Portfolio Investment Survey benchmarks and on monthly data reported under the Treasury International Capital (TIC) reporting system.
2/ Includes Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles, and Panama.

mister hankey
March 27, 2005, 05:37 PM
if the US ever has to go to war with China i dont think it will be very much of a land war with maybe only small groups of solders inside of china trying to get a revolution going. But it will most likly be a naval war and while there navy is decads behind ours. It is catching up but is about 20 yrs behind so in 20 yrs they should be where we are now but in 20 yrs will we also be that much farther along so we will still have better stuff than them so unless they just happen to come to some kind of brake through in military hardware we will probly always be just out of there reach technology wise.

March 27, 2005, 07:33 PM
Wars are not political, they are economic....that's what my Dad always said.

March 27, 2005, 08:56 PM
If it's going to be military it's going to be nukes. If it's nukes--no winners.

Now, on the economic front. IIRC, China buys right around 20% of each new Treasury offering. That's one fifth of our national debt. If they wanted to beat us into the ground, they simply stop buying our debt. Should they decide to do so, they will cause an interest rate spike like none we've seen before because we are addicted to our federal debt ($7.2 Trillion and counting).

On the flip side, they will eventually have to unpeg their currency (yuan) from the dollar and things (like steel, raw commodities, etc.) will suddenly get more expensive for them, slowing down their growth dramatically. IMO, this will put them on a relatively equal footing with US in the world economy.

Lastly, I agree completely with Nightcrawler:

China is, very slowly, liberalizing. Technology is aiding this; despite their attempts, the Chinese Government can't control the internet, and literally millions of Chinese students are living in the US now, studying here, taking in our way of life, and breathing the free air.

I have spent time there. The people are decent and the leaders are slowly moving into the 21st century. The Olympics will help.

Yes, they are definitely our biggest competitor. Yes we should keep and eye on them. But our biggest risk is economic and not military, IMHO.

March 27, 2005, 09:10 PM
Someone posted China lacks the ability to deliver thier nukes. I think that's incorrect. I'm fairly sure that China can send thier nuclear weapons a little further than North Korea, which would put them somewhere inside the west coast. I'll try to find my source later.

March 28, 2005, 08:39 AM
At least 4 Xia class SSBNs, and building more. Yes, they are comparatively noisy and easily tracked, but each new boat is improved over the previous, and they do occasionally slip our SSKNs. At least enough to give pause.The Xia's weakness is it has to get closer to the target than say, an Ohio class, which can hit just about anywhere on Earth from Groton or Bremerton, sitting at the pier. They also have lots of Bear and Badger bombers. Again, yes, slow and easily tracked, but they have lots of them. IIRC, their Finback fighter/bombers are capable of delivering big mushrooms, too. Between this, and the economic death spiral that would result from conventional war, not a pretty outcome for either country, I believe.

March 28, 2005, 10:13 AM
"Surely, China has nukes. What they don't have, is a way to deliver them much further than Japan."

How many semi truck mounted shipping containers (from China) litter the American landscape? Read and article about how many of these are not even really checked by Customs. It is staggering. I know of at least one (during Clinton's watch) that was loaded with AK's. The story went that these were meant to be sold to US uban gangs. I've read of few of these containers being packed full of Chinese citizens. Supposedly these were illigals looking for a better life.

Another point. We hear a lot about cheap, illegal Mexican labor. You almost hear nothing of cheap, legal Chinese labor that is used extensively in our high tech sectors (Universitys, IT companies and even the federal government). One of our local university centers looks like a China Town at lunch. Why hire an American Phd. when you can work four of his Chinese competitors for the same tab? How many of these folks out there that might be spies or even covert operators of equipment that comes in under our radar?

You underestimate a potential enemy and don't be too shocked if get your tail handed to you.

March 28, 2005, 10:28 AM
I agree with Nightcrawler. War should be avoided- I have no doubt this would be WWIII.

March 28, 2005, 11:07 AM
"Taiwan will be gobbled up within five years."

Unfortunately for the Reds, Taiwan is an island. A few diesel/electric subs with modern Mk 48 torps will play hell with any invasion fleet. Not to mention the fact that Taiwan bought a "research" reactor from G.E., back in the early seventies. Wonder what they were researching? My bet is if bad ol' Bejing tries to put its paws on itty bitty Taiwan, Bejing is going to find a mess of fissioning plutonium in its greedy face.

"The US will be powerless to prevent it."

I think a couple of carrier groups backed by Air Force planes hosted by a willing Taiwan, not to mention a handful of nuke attack subs, could convince them to not try...

"The same fate will befall S. Korea, shortly after."

The South korean army isn't the same as it was in 1950 - fighting on their home ground, with U.S. help, I am more than confident thay can hold their own, especially seeing as how heavily mined the DMZ is.

March 28, 2005, 01:48 PM
Dave Markowitz wrote:
If China and the US go to war, China's economy will probably collapse in very short order. We are by far China's biggest trading partner.

25%-40% of China's exports go to the USA, depending on who is doing the estimating.

War with China would be very bad for our economy...recession time. War with China would be devastating for China...depression time & no more $$$ to fund a military build-up.

In an absolute dollar-sense, our trade with China is on par with our trade with Taiwan.

Nightcrawler wrote:
Taiwan needn't become an issue. And here's why. The Old Guard Communists in China are a dying breed; they're being replaced by a newer generation that doesn't want China to fall into chaos and disarray like Russia has.

The PRC propaganda machine has worked wonders. Taiwan, Tajikistan, Tibet have never really been considered parts of China, but the population has been force-fed the "T" propaganda so much, that it is a nationalistic imperative for the Chinese.

Expect widespread support from the Chinese population for action in the "T's."

Nightcrawler wrote:
Eventually, I predict that the two will meet in the middle and reunite peacably.

I doubt it. The Taiwanese have no desire to become part of a repressive China, for the most part. China will try to take them by force, most likely. If (50-100 years doen the road) China liberalizes, then Taiwan might reunify...or keep going their merry way.

richyoung wrote:
I think a couple of carrier groups backed by Air Force planes hosted by a willing Taiwan, not to mention a handful of nuke attack subs, could convince them to not try...

Land based planes in range of China's short range ballistic missiles would be a bad idea. The smaller Air Force attack planes might have to sit it out until either China has exhausted its short range missiles across the straights, or we have destroyed them.

March 28, 2005, 03:37 PM
We'd lose. There would have to be a draft, whereupon 40% or more of the current male population would flee to Canada refusing to fight, leaving the rest of us to wage a guerilla war for decades.

Ky Larry
March 28, 2005, 08:54 PM
China wants to own Taiwan for the same reason it wanted Hong Kong back.
Taiwan is technoligically advanced, has enormous manufacturing facilities, and had a first class system of roads docks, ports, airports, and canals. If China invaded Taiwan and was forced to fight a messy, destructive conventional war, they would be killing the goose that lays the golden egg. They would probably win, but there would be nothing left worth owning. The same goes for a thermonuclear conflict, only there would be even less left of Taiwan.
What's truly frightening is if the raw materials of Siberia are made available to the growing Chinese manufacturing base. This could create an economic giant that would dwarf the world's economy.

Gabby Hayes
March 28, 2005, 09:01 PM
And who are we going to be fighting with? We've pretty much already called up all of the 50 and 60-year-old reservists we can find. Now we've stretched the Reserve enlistment age to 39. We're having all we can do to hold our own against second-rate insurgents in the middle east with the small force that we have. Any attempt at a draft would get bogged down in the courts for years while the liberals fought over whether to draft women and assign them to active ground combat roles. Fortunately for us the Chinese don't have a good way to get over here, and probably don't want to anyway. Nor are we stupid enough to venture onto the Asian landmass again. This war would end up a draw because neither side would want to go fight on the other's turf. Our biggest threat would be France attacking us from the rear. What would we do with all those prisoners? :scrutiny:

Felonious Monk
March 28, 2005, 09:38 PM
Lee Lapin said:
No need for them to fire a shot... or drop a bomb. We are burying ourselves in debt, selling our birthright for a cheap teevee set, hollowing out our industrial base, job market, economy, and society. The Chinese are waiting patiently, they are the world's past masters of patience. Astute insight, my friend. Instant gratification has become our achilles' heel. Witness the success of the "Payday Advance" industry. Our father's generation called it loansharking. Now it's legal, and supposedly acceptable to charge 700% APR so you can 'get your bling bling on' without having to wait for payday. Most amazing of all, it's become a HUGE industry--are there really enough financially stupid people to support all of this?

Lord, help us. :rolleyes:

March 28, 2005, 10:39 PM
It's been said before, the "yuan" is artificially pegged to the dollar, that can't last and only happens now due to the West's connivance. We decide to suck it up and stop trading with China and declare a military embargo on their shores? The other nations of the world will quickly pick up the slack in terms of buying and selling from us and China will slip back into the stone age in short order. We'll waste their Navy in short order, stand off offshore, kill their satellites and destroy their launch facilities and watch a billion man army wave their puny AK's and whine in unison.

Push come to shove, "global dislike" :rolleyes: for the US is quickly going to be trumped by economic reality. The rest of the world can live without China, as can we with some short term pain, but China can't maintain it's economy without the West and their trading parties being friendly.

China gets uppity and capital will flee Hong Kong and Shanghai, shutting down China's only real economic security and draw. The first crushing of an anti-war or seperatist movement on top of aggression towards Taiwan and it's neighbors and world public opinion goes hard the other way.

History will see the fall of Communism repeat itself.

March 29, 2005, 12:32 AM
I stand to be corrected but if i remember the loses in the Korea war where:

US 59,000
North Korea 300,000
China 1,000,000

March 29, 2005, 12:54 AM
It'd likely be more of an economic war than anything else. Throw in massive legal/illegal immigration... Shooting wars are a possibility, but not likely.

It'd be safer and cheaper for us to foster anti-communist groups in China and clamp down on illegal immigration. The Chinese have already bought off enough politicians that we won't do so.

March 29, 2005, 12:59 AM
China cannot cross the Formosa straits
It that simple
They could bomb Taiwan into the stone age which makes invading it pointless, but they simply do not have the maritime capability to launch a contested amphibious invasion. It would end up like the Bismarck Sea in WWII
China is not yet a maritime power. They have ships, but have no real naval warfare experience and the US can project force antwhere it wants
We can have B-52's from the Marianas covering the straits in a few hours or less and we could have 3-5 carrier groups there within 2 weeks
The Chinese navy would become a new reef in the straits of Formosa

If I were China, I'd be looking north for my resources
Russia is in complete disarray and we would no be able to project force into Siberia like we could Taiwan

March 29, 2005, 01:17 AM
Third Rail,
faustulus, something about freedom and eternal vigilance comes to mind....
So if I want to keep my freedom I have to assume everyone who is not like me is my enemy? That is a dead end path my friend.

April 11, 2005, 09:49 PM
One thing overlooked in this discussion is India. I think it was last month's issue of Proceedings, (the U.S. Naval Institute's magazine) that talked about the growth of India's military power. They are financing the latest generations of Russian Mig and Sukhoi fighters. They also have an aircraft carrier (not V/STOL carrier) on order from Russia. They are developing a formidable blue-water capability.

There was a recent Indian Air Force/USAF exercise where we got our clocks cleaned. Now, the USAF F-15Cs did not have AWACS support and were outnumbered 6 to 1, but AWACS can get shot down and we EXPECT the odds to be against us.

While India can also challenge us as a "Regional Hegemonic Power" and make life miserable for the USN in the Indian Ocean, they also serve as a counterweight to China. If I recall correctly, India and China went to war in 1962. I consider a conflict between those two and or a conflict between India and Pakistan more likely.

model 649
April 11, 2005, 10:17 PM
Meanwhile China and India are creating some kind of "strategic alliance" to deal with the rest of the world. Our only hope is to starve them out.

cracked butt
April 12, 2005, 12:42 AM
One huge deterrent and advantage in war we have is stealth technology. I don't think China is even remotely close to developing the capabilities we have. The US having the B2 bomber which takes off from a completely unreachable square state in the middle of the continent can hit any place in the world with precision munitions up to and including nukes and can get back home pretty much completely undetected. A conventional war against the US is simply unwinnable no matter who the players are.

Is there any reason or anything to gain by the US going to war with China? Most likely not. The only outstanding reason is over Taiwan, but the Chinese stand to lose a lot more than they can gain by ttempting to invade the island.

April 12, 2005, 12:47 AM
If we went to war with China Wal Mart would close up. :eek: As most of store is Made In China. They with the help of the world shopping at WM are pouring money into China and that will come back and bit us some day. Wal Mart is about the most unamerican company I can think of. Those that buy guns made in China are just as bad. Your supporting our enemy.

50 Freak
April 12, 2005, 02:48 AM
What the hell was that today on the news about India and China coming together and announcing they want to the new regional power?

Oh crap if India and China ever really got together, we'd get our arses kicked.

Good thing India and the US are pretty strong allies. After all, we hire a crap load of their techies and outsource plenty of our jobs over to them. :uhoh: :uhoh:

Ol' Badger
April 12, 2005, 08:21 AM
Bear in mind, too, that the use of weapons of mass destruction would be politically counter-productive for the USA. If we did so, we'd be portrayed to the world as monsters, bent on eliminating third-world opposition to our superpower status. Many nations and peoples would buy into this.

BFD smoke'em if you got'em!

April 12, 2005, 11:19 AM
Call me crazt, but here is a idea that crossed my mind. AS in the news today-India and China starting to form an alliance. with the continued growth of both countries they need oil. So together they march on the middle east. There are already more Indians working in Kuwait than there are Kuwaitis. Could this be the 1,000,000 man army coming from the East as told in the book of revelations????? Just a thought.

April 12, 2005, 12:01 PM
China will have a shortage of freshwater long before it has shortages of oil. The Yellow River doesn't even drain any water into the sea for 20% of the year, as it is too overtaxed for water. Taiwan won't help them there. The only thing for them to do is to march inland.

April 12, 2005, 12:19 PM
So long as China and the United States continue an economic relationship that is mutually beneficial, the chances of a war developing are slim to none.

Frederich Bastiat said it best

"When goods don't cross borders, armies will."

April 12, 2005, 01:14 PM
What is being overlooked here is a simple lesson in would be easier for China to "annex" sections and parcels of russia...they have no military to speak of, other than a nuclear deterent that may or may not be used.

While this is a fact, also consider that we ARE making inroads with the old Warsaw Pact nations. The biggest, so far, is Ukraine. We also have on our side most of the old Eastern Communist nations as well. Kazhakstan, Uzbehkistan, Kurdistan.

And we have a whole nation of pissed off Aussies that might just want to help out a little, as well. :) As it stands, Japan cannot fight. We put that into their constitution. They are peaceful and wish to stay that way. However there was an article today talking about how Koizumi was somewhat upset at the anti-Japanese rhetoric being thrown around in mainland China about their jaded past...dealing with atrocities before and during WWII. Backed into a corner, Japan will come out fighting, but with a diffrent kind of combat. We are transfering from a nuclear society to an information age society. Back in WWII we had a love for Panacea Targets. (Hit that target, and the war is going to end day before tomorrow)...well, we now have the ability to actually FIND those types of targets, so to speak. Surviellance and intellegence gathering are alot better than most people realize. And if you believe our press saying just how inept our intellegence braches are...then um...well...yeah. The DIA and NSA are in the bussiness of keeping close watch on our enemy...the CIA and FBI are losing some favor, much how you would see the KGB and GRU fight for favor in the old Soviet Union.

Which brings me up to my last in the lists of allies...yes...Russia. They are closer to being our allies than most realize. May not like us being in their bussiness all the time...but you must remember that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"....Russia and China no longer march to the same drummer anymore....

What does all this mean in this Thread? It means that most of us are politically aware...that we are concerned with the safety and security of our homeland. But the one, trully important thing we can't do is look into the hearts and minds of the "other side"...they may come over here and ask for an ice-cream for all we know....or come out with guns blazing...never can tell. :)

And we must remember our history....we were wanting to use Germany, before WWII, as a buffer against, and even a way to get rid of, Russia and Stalin.


April 12, 2005, 06:54 PM
We decide to go to war with China. On the first day they draft every male and give him his orders. The second day we send a recon unit into China. 20 million Chinese soldiers surrender to it. On the third day 40 million Chinese soldiers surrender to an aerial drone. On the fourth day 80 million surrender.
On the fifth day they send one guy with a note that says "Are you ready to give up yet?".

China's current population:1,298,847,624

How much would it cost to keep 140 million POWs for a week? Could we even pull it off while complying with the laws of war?

April 12, 2005, 07:30 PM
For obvious economic reasons, the Chinese never pick a fight with the US. Their continued economic growth at our expense causes the downfall of their Communist government, while continuing to erode the U.S. economy. As the economy worsens from the high standards Americans have become used to, and crime escalates, the weak-minded fools in this country continue to turn to the government to make it all better. Increasing socialist programs and skyrocketing taxes and regulations sap the economy and the individualism of Americans further, leading up to a firearm confiscation program, coordinated by the ever-more-powerful UN.

Finally, the remaining freedom-loving Americans mostly in the rural areas, begin armed revolution. Orders from Washington for the military to put down the insurrection result in mass desertions. Horrified by all the violence, weak-willed liberals flee to Canada and Mexico in droves. The ever-growing rebellion eventually takes control, seizes Washington, disbands the federal government, and begins a new one based on a letter-strict interpretation of the Constitution based on the intentions of the Founders.

With unfettered personal liberty, free of government interference, and without a bloated government sucking up 3/4 of the nation's wealth-producing capacity, it only takes a generation for the traditional American values of ingenuity and innovation lead to the nation regaining its position of economic leadership and standard of living in the world, just as those values did in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Too much to hope for, I guess...

April 12, 2005, 08:09 PM
There would have to be a draft, whereupon 40% or more of the current male population would flee to Canada refusing to fight

I have my doubts that 40% would flee to Canada. Maybe 4%. I have met 1 person in my life in high school or college who would seriously go to Canada, and he would be no loss to the US.

April 12, 2005, 08:58 PM
What is it now? 1 Billion screaming china-men, vs 300million americans.

Remember, there are a lot of Indians that China-men. And the Americans are good at pitting regional enemies against each other too.

April 12, 2005, 09:11 PM
The more important thing is that it will likely never happen. Once China sheds the vestigies of Communism, the flashpoint of Taiwan will fade as an issue and I would expect some kind of peaceful solution to the situation. Amen. I quite agree.

April 12, 2005, 09:25 PM
Interesting point of view on the Taiwan-mainland China issue. According to the results of a scientific poll conducted in late March by the Chinese Culture University on Taiwan, 65% of the university students on Taiwan would be unwilling to defend the island if the Chinese Communists were to attack; only 35% would be willing. Released on April 7, 2005, the poll surveyed 1161 students enrolled at National Taiwan University, National Chengchi University, and nine other major universities in northern Taiwan. Source:

If this is indeed the case, I personally see no good reason for us (the U.S) to get in the middle of a spat between mainland China and the island of Taiwan. As Standing Wolf has observed... I believe the Chinese people will simply outgrow and outnumber their communist masters, and kick them out of their way. I recall a statement about the rulers of mainland China attributed to some folks in China after the Tianamen Square debacle in 1989. "You can out gun us. We will outlive you."

April 12, 2005, 10:22 PM
All mainland China needs to capture Taiwan is:
(a) a small fleet of ships, which they have built and......
(b) a sufficient number of subs, some they built and the rest they bought from Russia and.....
(c) a medium range missle capability to hold our carrier forces out of range at least on a temporary basis, which they now have too
(d) Hilly or her equal in the WH.....

That is the only war they are interesed in but unfortunately one that could very likely happen.


April 12, 2005, 11:59 PM
(d) Hilly or her equal in the WH.....
We can beat all of the military aspects of China trying to invade Taiwan, but not the last one
If that happens we need to worry about China invading US! :what:

April 13, 2005, 07:57 AM


So true!


April 13, 2005, 11:02 PM

Thousands of Chinese Villagers Protest Factory Pollution

BEIJING, April 13 - Thousands of people rioted this week in a village in southeastern China, overturning police cars and driving away officers who had tried to stop elderly villagers protesting against pollution from nearby factories.

By this afternoon, three days after the riot, witnesses say crowds had convened in Huaxi Village in Zhejiang Province to gawk at a tableau of destroyed police cars and shattered windows. Police officers outside the village were reportedly blocking reporters from entering the scene but local people, reached by telephone, said villagers controlled the riot area.

"The villagers will not give up if there is no concrete action to move the factories away," said Mr. Lu, a villager who witnessed part of the confrontation and refused to give his full name. "The crowd is growing. There are at least 50,000 or 60,000 people."

Other villagers gave substantially smaller crowd estimates. But they agreed on the broad outlines of a violent clash on Sunday that came when local villagers acted on their frustration after, they say, trying in vain for two years to curb pollution from chemical plants in a nearby industrial park.

An account in a local state-controlled newspaper blamed the brawl on local agitators and said thousands of people had set upon government workers with rocks, clubs and sticks.

There were conflicting reports of injuries, and Mr. Lu said two elderly female protesters were gravely injured after being run over by a police vehicle. The story in the Dongyang Daily newspaper said more than 30 government employees were hospitalized, including five with serious injuries. Neither account could be confirmed.

The riot occurred on the same weekend that several thousand people in Beijing and Guangzhou held protests against Japan. These demonstrations, however, were officially authorized, with youthful urbanites shouting angry slogans and, at one point, tossing bottles at the Japanese Embassy, at a time of heightened diplomatic tensions between the two countries.

But the riot described in Huaxi Village is seen as a symptom of the widening social unrest in the Chinese countryside that has become a serious concern for government leaders. Last year, tens of thousands of protesters in western Sichuan Province clashed with the police in a protest over a long-disputed dam project. Smaller rural protests are becoming commonplace and are often violent.

Huaxi Village is a few hours' drive south of Hangzhou, the provincial capital of coastal Zhejiang. It is a short distance from the Zhuxi Industrial Function Zone, the local industrial park that villagers say is home to 13 chemical factories.

"The air stinks from the factories," said a villager, Wang Yuehe. She said the local river was filled with pollutants that had contaminated surrounding farmland.

"We can't grow our crops. The factories had promised to do a good environmental job, but they have done almost nothing."

Mrs. Wang said that villagers had pooled their money for two years and sent representatives to file complaints at government petition offices in Zhejiang Province and in Beijing. "But there have been no results so far," she said.

On March 24, a group of elderly people, mostly women, set up bamboo tents and other barriers on the road leading to the factories. On April 2, the government temporarily shut down the factories. But by Sunday, local officials had dispatched police officers and workers to break up the protest. Villagers said as many as 3,000 officers arrived in scores of cars and buses.

The fight apparently erupted after officers had already dismantled the makeshift tent city on the road. Villagers say thousands of angry people hurried to the scene after the police attacked some of the elderly protesters. The mob then surrounded workers and officers, according to witnesses and the newspaper account.

Some local officials who had retreated to a nearby school compound were attacked when they tried to leave on foot. "I saw over 10 bodies on the ground, both officials and villagers," said Mr. Lu.

Several villagers said that local officials own shares in different local factories. But according to the story in the official newspaper, local officials had "paid great attention" to the environmental problems and had paid compensation for past discharges of pollutants into the river.

The story also said that officials decided to break up the protests on Sunday because they were worried that "the coming of cold air and dramatic temperature drops threatened the health of feeble old women."

A reporter for an English-language newspaper in Hong Kong, the South China Morning Post, managed to visit the riot scene and described overturned buses and shattered cars, adding that "a police uniform is draped over one car - a trophy." The reporter , whose account was published today, was detained by the police after leaving the village but released after her notes were confiscated.

April 15, 2005, 10:35 PM
Shameless plug:

Perhaps my latest op-ed in RealClearPolitics is of some relevance to the topic at hand:

If you enjoyed reading about "US vs. China" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!