Author: Liu whore

will there be a war between china and america? [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 1

Post time 2009-4-30 23:26:37 |Display all floors
You think way too much!

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-5-1 02:23:06 |Display all floors
If and this is a BIG IF there is war between China and America it will be because we somehow ended up on opposite sides of another conflict some place else. The most likely scenario would involve that insane munchkin in charge of the DPRK.  If dear leader mini mouse wants to, he could simply nuke S.Korea or Japan. That would force America into the conflict. What happens after that would depend on the reaction of both China and Russia to our inevitable involvement. That's the problem with allies and defense agreements. You get dragged into conflicts that you really don't want any part of.

Take Israel as a good example. Perhaps she would be less of an arrogant butthole towards her neighbors if America pulled the plug on the bottomless pit of economic aid she is accustomed to.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 5Rank: 5

Post time 2009-5-1 04:59:36 |Display all floors

Reply #26 tongluren's post

Sure, raise it to 200 and they'd be on the bottom in the opening shots of any conflict. If you think that the US, and allies, would be foolish enough not, NOT, to have shadows on them all, you'd best go get your head examined. Yes, the simple fact that the US and Co don't have thjat many SSNs is valid, but if you can build more, so can they. Really tong, you live in a fools paradise if you think that this amount of boomers will secure China. Trade and intertwined interests will do that alone without the need for all of the hardware you suggest....and it's much cheaper, non-confrontational and nobody need "lie down and spread their legs" as you so eloquently put it. I certainly don't expect China to do this, but to expect anyone else to is also a gross miscalculation.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-5-1 06:17:58 |Display all floors

You are too paranoid

Originally posted by Liu  whore at 2009-4-29 08:11
anstralia say there will be a war between America and china sooner or later. don't think this is a cow. things change should we treat Tai wan? don't think all Tai wan people are freindl ...

Silly you.  Amerikan government feared "The Russians are coming!" and now fears "Chinese are kicking our butts out of East Asia".  You've become as silly and paranoid as the U.S. government and the extreme right warmongers.

Just go to bed, sleep, sleep like a baby, you'll know nothing would happen throughout the night. When you wake up, you'll find out there is no nuclear dust anywhere.  But, ........if you sleep with the warmonger, you'll have a real bad dream, and you might fall off the bed, silly.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2009-5-1 11:00:42 |Display all floors
The US used an economic weapon, its debt to China, to create an indirect security shield around itself.

As has been said before, if someone owes his banker a dollar, he will have to call on his banker but if he owes the banker a trillion dollars, the banker will be so concerned that he will have to call on the loan-taker.

Right now, China holds too much of US bonds; China has become the banker to the US. It's not likely that a banker will go to war with his biggest debtor. So China will not wage preemptive war on the US.

On the other hand, no one will disagree that the US has less to lose if it wages preemptive war on China, should it come to that some day.  Superpower and all, it has nothing to lose except to erase all those debts.  It has in fact thumbed its nose at the UN, a body which it has used to suit its own interest from time to time so what's to stop it from creating a flareup now and then, here and there, in order to raise tensions and force China's hand at protecting its own sovereignty?

Yet, knowing all this, China has bravely said she will not attack unless provoked. In other words, she will not execute preemptive first strike. When you think of that, it is indeed brave but risky. Brave because the other side may just accept it and proceed to test waters or even launch an obliterative first strike.

What China has been doing is to reduce the risk.  That is why she is strengthening her military forces. Because she has said she will not preempt.  

In much the same way the US has security guarantee through economics, China must also develop her own security guarantee through military reinforcements.  On a per capita basis, China's military spending and accumulation is too small for the present geopolitical situation.  On the other hand, the US has enough armaments to destroy every living thing on this planet many times over.  So far the US has shown adventurism without regard for others which has only led to destruction and mayhem.  Is there another 'guarantee' she won't? The answer is hard to find.

One therefore hopes that just as the US and Chinese peoples are friendly as brothers and sisters to one another, so too the US government of the day will reflect that mutual grassroots-to-grassroots affinity that will pave the way for a more peaceful and prosperous century this time.

If anything, China's government has been a constant in what it says it will do and not do.  Elements inside the US should not take advantage of this to posture the type of recklessness that will only result in unnecessary blood-letting, suffering and loss.

Looking at the arsenals around, for every second of peace, one must constantly invest in every day of goodwill.

America and China should be the best of friends, people and country.

Meanwhile, one must also be wary of the anglo-saxon equation.  Now that the light of the UK is dimming, it will no doubt do its utmost to disrupt any development of better relations between the two superpowers.  It has as usual started in the media section. Look at what the anglo journalists of the Economist and Far Eastern Economic Review have been writing.  Even the american-based Foreign Affairs has not been above the below-the-belt.   The anglo-saxons may be down but not out.  Elements in Australia have also been active.

What one hopes for this century will not be the transplantation of the seeds of conflict from nations to tribes.  The motto 'We are one' would be a better way to lay the cutlery at the negotiating table.

But for now, China must grow stronger. Unlike others, she has no guarantees. She has only painful lessons from history.

[ Last edited by markwu at 2009-5-1 11:21 AM ]

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2009-5-1 11:14:13 |Display all floors

That is Not Really True

I have heard this theory espoused quite a few times - that a rapidly dropping US$ would hurt China as much as it does America.  I just do not buy it.  China has only $2 Trillion in foreign currencies, with about 60% in U.S. dollars.  IF the U.S. dollar drops by 50%, what does that mean?  China would have lost 50% in that 60%, or about US$600 Billion.  BUT keep in mind that the total assets of the U.S. is about $150 Trillion.  The corresponding drop would mean a lost of $75 TRILLION to the Yanks, or more than 100 times. That is rather good leverage, don't you think?  Moreover, a drop of the U.S. dollar by that much also means that there is corresponding INCREASE of purchase power in the $800 Billion in foreign currency reserves that are not denominated in US$.  So the total "loss" is much less.  

It just means the Yuan becomes an international currency much faster - instead of another 10 years, it would be within 6 months.  I can assure you that China stands ready for that - it has been rehearsed more than once in Beijing already, and the results were shared with the jerks on Capital Hill.  WHY do you think they had been so very quiet recently?  Do you hear the clowns muttering nonsense such as 27.5% duty against Chinese goods?

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2009-5-1 11:24:47 |Display all floors

Kiwi You're So Silly

There is NO KNOWN TECHNOLOGY that will allow the instant destruction of a boomer (short of using nukes, and consider that once you start using nukes then all bets are off re "no first use") - before it can get off a shot or 16 from the silos.  The newer models are up to 10,000 tons and have double hulls that are well neigh indestructible.  Time to fire is less than 10 minutes.  China's subs are all equipped with ultra long wavelength communcation systems that cannot be jammed.  No question, the West can sink 1, 5, or even 10 before everyone gets smart.  But to think you can simultaneously incapacitate 200 is just plain silly.

It just takes ONE to pretty much wipe out a continent.  That's why they are so effective as deterrence.

NOBODY has 200 boomers, but China stands alone as the only nation capable of realistically building as many without emptying the coffers.  The Brits can maybe build one every 5 years.  The U.S. at best 1 a year.  The Aussies never.  China can build up to 3 a year NOW, and can ramp up to 10 a year without much effort.  They are a lot cheaper to build and run compared to aircraft carriers.

[ Last edited by tongluren at 2009-5-1 11:29 AM ]

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email:
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.