The number of nukes they have and their ability to wage a "hard war" as it were is completely irrelevant. What matters will be their economic prowess and their "soft war" capabilities. The test of a superpower is not how big of a war they can win, but how small of a war they can win. Honestly, don't start sizing up China's military power until they get involved in a long guerilla war, because that is the test of a superpower. We lost in Vietnam and the Soviets lost in Afghanistan, so guerilla wars are much more difficult to fight, even though they are "soft" by comparison to something like World War II. And by China fighting a guerilla war I don't mean throwing as many troops and money they have at the problem until they slaughter the opposing population, I mean counter-insurgency operations and sophisticated military planning which doesn't take their massive army and their overwhelming nuclear capabilities to be victorious. That's what I mean by China policing East Asia. One day they will have the same "soft war" capabilities as the United States, and that's when they will start controling most of Eastern and Central Asia, maybe even parts of the Middle East. They won't invade and conquer those nations, they will simply have a hegemony over them as the United States has had over the rest of the world since the fall of the Soviet Union. When they have internal security issues, or there is some sort of state-on-state war, then they will be the ones stepping in to restore order because they will have economic motivations to do so, as the United States has had. Who knows, perhaps the United States and The People's Republic of China will have their special forces working side by side to restore stability in regions like Central Asia and the Near East. I think that is a more than reasonable scenario. I think that some of the people on this thread have this idea that China is somehow "evil" and must be "stopped" from gaining any kind of world power. On the other side of the coin, some of you seem to be almost gleeful in your anticipation of China's growing strength. IMHO, both viewpoints are rather silly since we are not politicians and we are discussing this issue in an academic rather than practical sense. If I've ruffled any feathers by my last comment, I apologize. -DistantObservor.
The U.S. didn't want to risk war with China during the so-called Korean War because if China stepped in, the U.S. would have definetly 'retreated' big time. Nothing has changed since then and probably never will. China is going to do what China wants to do (and they probably have the power to do it) whatever it is, and I doubt the U.S. can do much about about except talk political rhetoric.
Actually, China did step into the Korean War, and they ended up pushing us back to the 38th parallel instead of letting us unite the Korean Peninsula. We didn't retreat all the way, we came to a ceasefire because the Chinese had accomplished their goal of maintaining a communist North. Much has changed since then. For one thing, the U.S. and China have one of the strongest economic ties in the world as evidenced by simply picking up and counting the number of things around you which have "made in China" written on them (of course, this assumes you are an American or living in America. If I am mistaken in my assumption, then I apologize). Other than that, I don't understand whether or not you were agreeing with my statement, disagreeing with it, or if it's just that you felt the need to quote the preceding post in your arguement, whatever that was for. Nothing you have said conflicts with what I said, as it was so ambiguous and broad and lacking in any opinion other than "China can do whatever the hell it wants" that I cannot think of any kind of reasonable response to it. That attitude I agree with for the most part, but only in that it would take a mighty effort to stop China from doing what it wants, and to that goal the United States is completely lacking in resolve. In my opinion we should be, as a powerful China policing East and Central Asia and possibly parts of the Middle East seems like it would take much of the security burden of that part of the world off of our shoulders, giving us the capability to respond more acutely in areas which need it more, and which are closer to home. For instance, should China really be serious about gaining and then maintaining some kind of supra-regional hegemony then it would be in China's best interests to subtley influence North Korea into a more open policy, as well as restraining it from attacking South Korea, which would mean that we could remove the approximately 40,000 troops we have stationed there. I am pretty sure that you misunderstood my comments as either a call against Chinese superpower status, or something similar to a "we must stop China" attitude, and it was not. If I am mistaken in that assumption, once again I apologize. The problem is that I don't understand why you quoted my post since there was really no reference to it in your own. Thank you. - DistantObservor.
Anyway, china is not agreesive to be an invader, not like Japan in WW2. Don't treat China as enemy, it is the politicians' dirty trick to over emphasize the Threat of China, no such thing indeed, China is a country loves Peace.
The following is a short post i made in the economics forum under the Alcohol thread: I also want to offer my reason as to why China keeps accepting Dollars, buying US bonds etc. - They know that they can not defeat US in a military contest. - Both would be losers if it comes to a nuclear ICBM exchange. They now (or soon will) have the power to destroy US economically at any time of their choosing. I doubt they will do this, but they will be in a position to demand the US conform to their wishes, especially about Taiwan.
The United States is not the only country that recognizes Taiwan's independance from China. They don't just have to convince the US, they have to convince most of the world . Other than that, I don't think that they will use their economic power to compel the United States to do anything, as the act of compulsion may damage the relationship.
China is big enough and strong enough to hold it's own just in just about any military situation it decides to expose itself too, including an ultimate 'Knock Down / Drag Out' with the U.S. or any other superpower. Underestimating China's military power will be a 'serious' mistake, even for the U.S. to make. Unfortunately with GWB at the helm in U.S., anything is possible I guess.
I don't understand why you are continueing with this arguement since there is none. I AM AGREEING WITH YOU. It seems as if you are simply using this thread as a place to rant about how militarily powerful China is. I am not argueing on that point. I am not saying that China could not handle itself in any military situation it chooses to expose itself to, in fact I am saying that it could. Everyone here who knows anything about military power knows that China is a force to be reckoned with, and what I am saying is that the growth of China as a superpower is inevitable, although I don't think that China will surpass the U.S., just equal it. If there ever was a major war between the United States and China which involved nuclear weapons, everyone would lose because that's what happens in a nuclear exchange. I have been trying to say that such a scenario is highly unlikely because of the mutual destruction it would bring to both countries along with any others that got caught in the middle. I have been trying to say that we in the United States should not be hostile to China, and apparently you have not been listening to my arguement Novacane because it seems like you are still argueing when there is no disagreement between us. -DistantObservor.
No. No. Never. (ummm...well if chineese women take over Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) Peace... Rick
This is an interesting news article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10170448/ Not because of the story the headline is about but because of the information it contains that relates to the the topic of this thread. Despite China's huge labor force (and partly because of it) the entire nation faces a serious water shortage. The country has failed in it's anti-polution efforts (also mentioned in the article) and shortages are frequent for both the population and industry. The number of nukes, the size and quality of it's military, the number of new factories and industries being built and the oil being imported will all mean very little if they lack the water needed to advance their economy. So I say those here are painting an excessivly bright future for the region have reason to go back and completely rethink their positions. Any country without adequate water supplies is very limited in what it can accomplish.
All we have to do to stop China from attacking us militarily is to make it so it will cost them too much. I'm the one who keeps harping on their possible use of the moon, which they would be willing to do at great cost of human lives if it proves doable at all. It takes a lot less technology to lob a missile from the moon to the Earth than it does to send it from China to the U.S. They can stand up there and throw rocks at us with nearly complete impunity while threatening to use cobalt warheads on us if we attack any of their ground targets. By rocks, I mean rocks. Put a rocket motor on a boulder with a guidance system, instant Deep Impact. Take out bases one by one, incinerate them in a way that still allows perfect safety for the ground troops in a day or two. Anyway, another discussion reminded me of the way that China really will bring us to our knees. They and a few other Asians sell us almost all of our technology. We are totally dependent on them for consumer technology and almost all other non-perishable items. Almost all of this technology is garbage. It quits working, wears out, or falls apart much faster than the same stuff did 20 years ago. It is much more likely to be garbage even brand new, like wire strippers that don't strip wire and screwdrivers that are poorly made so that they strip screws. In some ways it is worse when their very few items are as good as or better than American made because that helps drive more American businesses out of business. It also encourages people to buy more of that stuff. Our shoes made in China don't last a year. Clothing won't last much more than a year and it falls apart a lot sooner than it did 20 years ago. There are more ways to conquer a country than by military conquest. If it is conquered enough beforehand, even if a military conquest of some kind is required, it can be a token force. Americans could easily wake up one day and find American guns pointed at them to force them to submit to Chinese rule. A token invasion, they officially hand over the US government, we avoid a lot of hassle, and our own forces are dragging us out of bed and deciding who to put in front of firing squads before a lot of us even realize we've been invaded. I hope to God I'm wrong.
I think you are, MetaKron. However, Light, I think your point is quite valid. This scenario has crossed my mind many times, but usually when I think of water shortage I think of the Middle East and Central Asia rather than China because I have the old river systems of China stuck in my head. You are most certainly right, without adequate water supplies, everything else in the country goes to hell and means nothing at all. I completely forgot about Chinese over-industrialization and water pollution being a major factor in water shortage, rather than simply relying on the amount of H2O in the country without factoring how much of it is useable. Personally, I think that water shortage will become a massive global issue within the next 50-100 years, and that major disruptions will occur in the global community, and I have even tossed around the idea of a mini-dark age of sorts caused by a lack of water in many regions, massive immigrations which leads to intermittant conflict for many, many, many decades, eventually spreading outward from there. Anyway, my scenario was in the relatively near-term future, and it didn't involve China becoming westernized in it's standard of living and whatnot, just that the Chinese government will probably be able to pool what little rescources they have into a regional hegemony, although I could be wrong and they may invest in improving their infrastructure somehow. After the near-term scenario though, water shortage probably becomes too massive for them to exercise that kind of power any longer. Thanks for your insight. -DistantObservor.
MetaKron, looks like I'm all over you case tonight. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Cobalt bombs????? What science fiction have you been reading lately? There are no such things. It was once an idea during the late 1950s but proved totaly impractical. Another of your "facts" that needed to be corrected.
Yes, and when there was an oil embargo against Japan which helped cause WWII, did that stop Japan at all? Nope, they just TOOK what they needed even though they intially had a short supply of it. So if China has small amounts of water, what's to stop them from just going out and taking it? Let's not also forget what happens to a dog when you keep it caged up without food and water, it'll turn into a rapid dog. If the Chinese know they have little water and need it to survive, they'll fight with great zeal to acquire it. - N
Oil and water are two entirely different things, industrally and domestically speaking. You can take oil, yes, but taking water is a completely different story. It's either where it's needed or it isn't. It's simply not practical to, say, import the millions of gallons needed each day to operate a steel mill. And tranporting millions more all across that vast country every single day for the population to use for drinking, cooking and bathing would place a tremendous strain on any up-and-coming economy. They will have to invest tremendous amounts of capital in cleaning up and improving their water supply. Otherwise, that one factor alone will be enough to cripple their ambitions to become a true superpower.
Nope - just letting you know how you are coming across. Most of the people here can see that you aren't nearly as smart as you wish to appear. If you wish to continue making a fool of yourself, go right ahead. It's actually quite amusing at times. (And that's usually how it is with those who don't know what they're talking about.)
Light, I talk so much among my companions IRL about water shortage and the future of geo-politics in a water scarce world, and I completely forgot about water scarcity and pollution in China. I can't believe I left that out when it's all I have been talking about for a few years now. I feel ashamed, thank you for enlightening me. -DistantObservor.
You don't seem to realize or care how you look. Next to the word "specious" in the dictionary is your picture. I know, I just put it there. What are you even saying for people to believe?
Many china's girls come to malaysia as tourists, but they stayed overdue and became whores in hotels.
