Wildalaska
member
Me and the fat ninjas will hold em off, thats what the 2nd is all about
WildarmaggeddonAlaska
WildarmaggeddonAlaska
US vs. China
- Thread starter 50 Freak
- Start date
- Status
thumbody
Member
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
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
Lone_Gunman
Member
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.
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.
Preacherman
Member
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...
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...
armoredman
Member
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
Member
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.
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
Member
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.
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.
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.
Nightcrawler
Member
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.
jefnvk
Member
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.
Lone_Gunman
Member
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.
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.
MudPuppy
Member
Yeah, China has nukes
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...
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
Moderator Emeritus
Take a look at the table at http://www.ustreas.gov/tic/mfh.txt .
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...
lpl/nc
MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
(in billions of dollars)
HOLDINGS 1/ AT END OF PERIOD
2005 2004
COUNTRY Jan Dec
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
(snip)
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.
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...
lpl/nc
MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
(in billions of dollars)
HOLDINGS 1/ AT END OF PERIOD
2005 2004
COUNTRY Jan Dec
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
(snip)
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
Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 31
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.
hrb02
Member
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:
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.
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:
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.
jobu07
Contributing Member
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.
entropy
Member
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.
"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.
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.
natedog
Member
I agree with Nightcrawler. War should be avoided- I have no doubt this would be WWIII.
richyoung
Member
"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.
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.
Dave Markowitz wrote:
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 $$$ to fund a military build-up.
In an absolute dollar-sense, our trade with China is on par with our trade with Taiwan.
Nightcrawler wrote:
The PRC propaganda machine has worked wonders. Taiwan, Tajikistan, Tibet have never really been considered parts of China, but the population has been force-fed the "T" propaganda so much, that it is a nationalistic imperative for the Chinese.
Expect widespread support from the Chinese population for action in the "T's."
Nightcrawler wrote:
I doubt it. The Taiwanese have no desire to become part of a repressive China, for the most part. China will try to take them by force, most likely. If (50-100 years doen the road) China liberalizes, then Taiwan might reunify...or keep going their merry way.
richyoung wrote:
Land based planes in range of China's short range ballistic missiles would be a bad idea. The smaller Air Force attack planes might have to sit it out until either China has exhausted its short range missiles across the straights, or we have destroyed them.
25%-40% of China's exports go to the USA, depending on who is doing the estimating.
War with China would be very bad for our economy...recession time. War with China would be devastating for China...depression time & no more $$$ 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:
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:
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:
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.
Lonestar.45
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,077
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.
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.
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
Member
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? 
- Status
