• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fancy a Western Pacific war with China ?

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Fancy a Western Pacific war with China ?

I was reading today, on Google that in repeated American war game scenarios, that China would easily defeat any combination of American forces in the Western pacific and South China Sea.

Neither Guam nor Taiwan could be defended, and both would fall to superior Chinese forces.

That such information “True or False” should be leaked or made available, strongly suggests that the USA wants to mobilise American public opinion towards a massive build up of American forces and the supply of advanced weaponry.

It seems china has a considerable superiority in Ultra speed long range missiles, capable of seven times the speed of sound, for the guided attack of shipping, both from land bases and artificial islands.

Trump has announced that America is developing an extraordinarily super fast missile 14 times faster.???

I would suggest that the preparations for such a war is already in progress. Which would account for the attack on Chinese companies like Huawei and the now almost total ban on the supply of Chips made with American supplied technology and software. And the attempt to stop the supply of advanced telecom Equipment from Huawei and other major Chinese companies to the world markets. Trumps policies and trade war with China, is similar to that of America against Japan prior to WW2. Such trade wars and denials of trade equality have lead to many wars in the past.

The major flaw in this American strategy is that this will energise China to mobilise some of its vast resources toward replacing any such equipment with home developed alternatives. Something it has resited doing because of the worlds need for so few of these chip making machines to meet demand. Huawei on the other hand has been attacked on the grounds that it might be possible to put back doors into their advanced world leading 5G technology. All with out any proof that they have ever done so.

If China considers itself to be in a war situation it will have no compunction about using any intellectual property software or patented devices it may require.

However its past record would suggest that it has no need of outside help in developing even the most sophisticated technology, at break neck speed.

War or not, This American war like Strategy will very soon leave China and its leading Technology companies. In a world domination position in virtually every Technological field. And companies like Huawei in a virtual monopoly positions.

China already dominates world supply In the fields of telecommunication, smart phones and volume chip production. It is only in the fields of popular communication software, now dominated by Google, and in 5nm chips, that it has fallen behind, as up till now they were readily available on the world markets. It is inconceivable that China will not catch up and overtake existing suppliers in very short order indeed, now that they are forced to do so by the new American policies.

China’s main technological competitors, South Korea, and Japan would not stand in the way of a dominant China and would almost certainly, either remain neutral or switch sides in any any outright trade or active war, or suffer the inevitable fallout.

Europe, Africa and the Middle East are already turning to China as their major trade partner. And Americas influence in the world is dwindling. Perhaps only maintained to any extent at all, by the Nato alliance against Russia. Russia remains a force with in Europe through its dominant energy position. It is no longer a serious military threat. Russia would undoubtedly favour China against America in any global war situation.

Trump has undoubtedly misjudged the true world situation, and Americas ability to control it.

The USA remains a “Player” but no longer dominates politically, militarily or in trade.
 
Last edited:

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I don't fancy the USA's chances against both China and Russia - twins of evil that they might be so portrayed - and with such large land masses.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I doubt that either country would get involved in a war at this point. They may have wargame scenarios, as they had during the Cold War and since, but it's all hypothetical saber-rattling.

The decline of the U.S. has been common knowledge since the 1970s.

It is kind of ironic that U.S. companies started outsourcing to Communist China because they wanted to weaken organized labor in the U.S. and screw the working people for short-term profits. They probably thought they were so smart, but now, China has gained the advantage and become an even bigger threat than they ever were under Mao.

US foreign policy has been rather myopic and profit-driven for so long, it's no big surprise that we're now being hoisted by our own petard. Thank Ronald Reagan and his robotic followers for that.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
I don't fancy the USA's chances against both China and Russia - twins of evil that they might be so portrayed - and with such large land masses.
I do not believe for one minute that China would ever be the first to start a war with the USA.
However trump is using the fear of such a war to strengthen his position.
In attaching Chinese companies he is trying to force China's hand. however all he is achieving is to strengthen those companies and will Cause the Chinese to retaliate against important American companies like apple. And harm companies like Google by providing alternative compatable software.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I do not believe for one minute that China would ever be the first to start a war with the USA.
However trump is using the fear of such a war to strengthen his position.
In attaching Chinese companies he is trying to force China's hand. however all he is achieving is to strengthen those companies and will Cause the Chinese to retaliate against important American companies like apple. And harm companies like Google by providing alternative compatable software.

I don't believe China has any such intentions either. Not sure to what extent they might push brinkmanship though. Perhaps they would have learnt from the last major incident, with the Soviet Union, that it is just too foolish. And I tend to agree that it is mainly about bolstering the support at home as to the gobbyness of what is said.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Fancy a Western Pacific war with China ?

I was reading today, on Google that in repeated American war game scenarios, that China would easily defeat any combination of American forces in the Western pacific and South China Sea.

Neither Guam nor Taiwan could be defended, and both would fall to superior Chinese forces.

That such information “True or False” should be leaked or made available, strongly suggests that the USA wants to mobilise American public opinion towards a massive build up of American forces and the supply of advanced weaponry.

It seems china has a considerable superiority in Ultra speed long range missiles, capable of seven times the speed of sound, for the guided attack of shipping, both from land bases and artificial islands.

Trump has announced that America is developing an extraordinarily super fast missile 14 times faster.???

I would suggest that the preparations for such a war is already in progress. Which would account for the attack on Chinese companies like Huawei and the now almost total ban on the supply of Chips made with American supplied technology and software. And the attempt to stop the supply of advanced telecom Equipment from Huawei and other major Chinese companies to the world markets. Trumps policies and trade war with China, is similar to that of America against Japan prior to WW2. Such trade wars and denials of trade equality have lead to many wars in the past.

The major flaw in this American strategy is that this will energise China to mobilise some of its vast resources toward replacing any such equipment with home developed alternatives. Something it has resited doing because of the worlds need for so few of these chip making machines to meet demand. Huawei on the other hand has been attacked on the grounds that it might be possible to put back doors into their advanced world leading 5G technology. All with out any proof that they have ever done so.

If China considers itself to be in a war situation it will have no compunction about using any intellectual property software or patented devices it may require.

However its past record would suggest that it has no need of outside help in developing even the most sophisticated technology, at break neck speed.

War or not, This American war like Strategy will very soon leave China and its leading Technology companies. In a world domination position in virtually every Technological field. And companies like Huawei in a virtual monopoly positions.

China already dominates world supply In the fields of telecommunication, smart phones and volume chip production. It is only in the fields of popular communication software, now dominated by Google, and in 5nm chips, that it has fallen behind, as up till now they were readily available on the world markets. It is inconceivable that China will not catch up and overtake existing suppliers in very short order indeed, now that they are forced to do so by the new American policies.

China’s main technological competitors, South Korea, and Japan would not stand in the way of a dominant China and would almost certainly, either remain neutral or switch sides in any any outright trade or active war, or suffer the inevitable fallout.

Europe, Africa and the Middle East are already turning to China as their major trade partner. And Americas influence in the world is dwindling. Perhaps only maintained to any extent at all, by the Nato alliance against Russia. Russia remains a force with in Europe through its dominant energy position. It is no longer a serious military threat. Russia would undoubtedly favour China against America in any global war situation.

Trump has undoubtedly misjudged the true world situation, and Americas ability to control it.

The USA remains a “Player” but no longer dominates politically, militarily or in trade.
Some thoughts....
- Big difference between preparing for war & preparing for the possibility of war.
- The war game scenarios lacked detail. I wonder if they were for police actions
rather than all out war.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Some thoughts....
- Big difference between preparing for war & preparing for the possibility of war.
- The war game scenarios lacked detail. I wonder if they were for police actions
rather than all out war.

Hardly police actions if they involved the destruction of the American fleet and the total loss of Taiwan and Guam. A foot war on either China or the USA is almost unthinkable. though each could reach targets anywhere. With in minutes strategic targets on both sides could be eliminated.
in such a war there could only be one winner.

However the possibility of a limited war in the west pacific and China Sea, increases if the American Trade war escalates much further.

But either which way, the constant attack on Chinese companies will strengthen them, by forcing them into the gaps that they previously had no need to cover. They will quickly become self sufficient... China could not possibly permit anything else, or it would be strategically weakened.

I don't believe China has any such intentions either. Not sure to what extent they might push brinkmanship though. Perhaps they would have learnt from the last major incident, with the Soviet Union, that it is just too foolish. And I tend to agree that it is mainly about bolstering the support at home as to the gobbyness of what is said.

China is quite a different country today and is the perhaps the only one that could defeat the Russia of today.... Not that it would try. China has never been interested in expansionist wars, but only with recovering what it considers was historically theirs. (Right or Wrong)
In any war with the USA it would be more in the interest of Russia to side with China , at the very least by protecting its northern and western flanks.

The present situation is all about what is in the short term interests of Trump. and hang the USA.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
...That such information “True or False” should be leaked or made available, strongly suggests that the USA wants to mobilise American public opinion towards a massive build up of American forces and the supply of advanced weaponry...
Such an information leak could be by anyone, depending upon who seek advantage from it and who has access. Its media published (Reuters article that US data was compromised by someone in 2014. 4.3 million people have top secret clearance (source USA Today link). In addition its clear that the top brass have been using illegal surveillance on the US public -- revealed by Snowden's whistle blowing; so nobody trusts them either with surveillance of us or with keeping our military secrets. Surveillance of the public is attacking our republic, but we're going to spank the whistle-blower?! Honesty is being punished, while sneaky backstabbing is being encouraged. You can't encourage dishonesty among the brass without creating an environment of sneaky backstabbers. Its time tested truth. You can't fix it with new and improved security procedures.

I recall from the recent Red Hat summit how their security people spoke about implementing new security methods which tracked who had access to what, layers stacked upon layers of identity tracking. That's what the government will be using and what it thinks will help. Maybe its in use, already? Between then and now what allowed Snowden to comprise data surely would have helped others out of this enormous 4.3 million (between 2014 and now). There have, probably, been leaks all over the place. I would bet my 10$. To point out the incompetence: for a stupid period of time (probably 10+ years ago) the US government even let people use USB thumb drives, and this resulted in leaks, too. It was in the news. Hopefully it has stopped, but the problem is not the thumb drives. Its the sneaky backstabbing environment you create when you encourage this nasty KGB style stuff.

Now...who would have leaked this information? Um...we can't know. We simply don't have an environment which encourages honesty -- apparently.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Fancy a Western Pacific war with China ?

I was reading today, on Google that in repeated American war game scenarios, that China would easily defeat any combination of American forces in the Western pacific and South China Sea.

Neither Guam nor Taiwan could be defended, and both would fall to superior Chinese forces.

That such information “True or False” should be leaked or made available, strongly suggests that the USA wants to mobilise American public opinion towards a massive build up of American forces and the supply of advanced weaponry.

It seems china has a considerable superiority in Ultra speed long range missiles, capable of seven times the speed of sound, for the guided attack of shipping, both from land bases and artificial islands.

Trump has announced that America is developing an extraordinarily super fast missile 14 times faster.???

I would suggest that the preparations for such a war is already in progress. Which would account for the attack on Chinese companies like Huawei and the now almost total ban on the supply of Chips made with American supplied technology and software. And the attempt to stop the supply of advanced telecom Equipment from Huawei and other major Chinese companies to the world markets. Trumps policies and trade war with China, is similar to that of America against Japan prior to WW2. Such trade wars and denials of trade equality have lead to many wars in the past.

The major flaw in this American strategy is that this will energise China to mobilise some of its vast resources toward replacing any such equipment with home developed alternatives. Something it has resited doing because of the worlds need for so few of these chip making machines to meet demand. Huawei on the other hand has been attacked on the grounds that it might be possible to put back doors into their advanced world leading 5G technology. All with out any proof that they have ever done so.

If China considers itself to be in a war situation it will have no compunction about using any intellectual property software or patented devices it may require.

However its past record would suggest that it has no need of outside help in developing even the most sophisticated technology, at break neck speed.

War or not, This American war like Strategy will very soon leave China and its leading Technology companies. In a world domination position in virtually every Technological field. And companies like Huawei in a virtual monopoly positions.

China already dominates world supply In the fields of telecommunication, smart phones and volume chip production. It is only in the fields of popular communication software, now dominated by Google, and in 5nm chips, that it has fallen behind, as up till now they were readily available on the world markets. It is inconceivable that China will not catch up and overtake existing suppliers in very short order indeed, now that they are forced to do so by the new American policies.

China’s main technological competitors, South Korea, and Japan would not stand in the way of a dominant China and would almost certainly, either remain neutral or switch sides in any any outright trade or active war, or suffer the inevitable fallout.

Europe, Africa and the Middle East are already turning to China as their major trade partner. And Americas influence in the world is dwindling. Perhaps only maintained to any extent at all, by the Nato alliance against Russia. Russia remains a force with in Europe through its dominant energy position. It is no longer a serious military threat. Russia would undoubtedly favour China against America in any global war situation.

Trump has undoubtedly misjudged the true world situation, and Americas ability to control it.

The USA remains a “Player” but no longer dominates politically, militarily or in trade.
It will never happen because China's one the largest trading partners. It'll be just the cat and mouse games being played like they've done for decades.

If there's any real concerns it will be that of another Cold war.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Hardly police actions if they involved the destruction of the American fleet and the total loss of Taiwan and Guam. A foot war on either China or the USA is almost unthinkable. though each could reach targets anywhere. With in minutes strategic targets on both sides could be eliminated.
in such a war there could only be one winner.

In a war of the kind you're describing, the only "winners" would be those who are dead. The losers would still be alive.

I'm not sure about the scenario you're discussing. China has threatened Taiwan since 1949, so I can understand that part of it. But Guam? That's not the only US base in the west Pacific. They'd have to attack US bases in South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines, too.

However the possibility of a limited war in the west pacific and China Sea, increases if the American Trade war escalates much further.

I'm not sure why the possibility of war with China would increase with a trade war. If all they want to do is trade with us, then good relations are vital for a healthy trade relationship.

This has been the main problem from the very beginning in that US globalists believed that by opening China and trading with them more and more, it will lead to better relations, a friendlier Chinese government, and a more stable global economy.

But that was putting the cart before the horse. We should have established solid, friendly relations first, then open up trade.

But either which way, the constant attack on Chinese companies will strengthen them, by forcing them into the gaps that they previously had no need to cover. They will quickly become self sufficient... China could not possibly permit anything else, or it would be strategically weakened.

I think China is probably much strategically stronger than they were 40-50 years ago - and even back then they were still pretty strong. From the U.S. side, some are saying that the U.S. has given away too much and has been too deferent and conciliatory towards China for far too long, we've essentially created a monster.

Again, the irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife. After hearing capitalists, conservatives, and other Cold Warriors crow so much about so-called "Soviet expansionism," and how we should be sooooo scared of little island nations like Grenada, they ended up giving away the whole show to Communist China.

China is quite a different country today and is the perhaps the only one that could defeat the Russia of today.... Not that it would try. China has never been interested in expansionist wars, but only with recovering what it considers was historically theirs. (Right or Wrong)

I don't think China would try any aggressive or expansionist wars at this point. Not that they couldn't win, but the costs would be enormous. All they would end up "winning" would be a radioactive junkpile.

In any war with the USA it would be more in the interest of Russia to side with China , at the very least by protecting its northern and western flanks.

The present situation is all about what is in the short term interests of Trump. and hang the USA.

I think it would be incredibly foolish for any of the three powers (Russia, USA, or China) to start any wars with each other. There's no particular reason for it. We have no territorial disputes to speak of, except perhaps maritime disputes along the Arctic Rim.

Regarding Trump, at least in terms of US relations with China, there has been a noticeable undercurrent in US public opinion which has been mistrustful of China and still sees them somewhat as a Cold War adversary. The same can be observed regarding US perceptions of Russia. The only real difference is that the Chinese Communist government has remained in power continuously and uninterrupted, whereas Russia has undergone extensive internal changes since the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

I always thought that was pretty strange, since Russia stopped being communist, yet it didn't matter to the US government; they were still the bad guys in their eyes. Yet China remained communist, and our government warmed up to them more and more. A lot of Americans also thought it strange at the time, but they were drowned out and ignored by the shrill calls for globalism and free trade. Still, it led to this undercurrent of opinion which has been smoldering under the surface for quite some time, and Trump appears to be feeding from that for support.

China also has problems, particularly a PR problem - not unlike Trump. There are Chinese people in Taiwan and Hong Kong who show open disdain for the Chinese government and its leaders. I remember when some NBA team official made a tweet about Hong Kong, and the Chinese government was so upset about it. They come across as highly sensitive and overreact to the slightest little criticisms. It's hard to figure them out at times.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
In a war of the kind you're describing, the only "winners" would be those who are dead. The losers would still be alive.

I'm not sure about the scenario you're discussing. China has threatened Taiwan since 1949, so I can understand that part of it. But Guam? That's not the only US base in the west Pacific. They'd have to attack US bases in South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines, too.



I'm not sure why the possibility of war with China would increase with a trade war. If all they want to do is trade with us, then good relations are vital for a healthy trade relationship.

This has been the main problem from the very beginning in that US globalists believed that by opening China and trading with them more and more, it will lead to better relations, a friendlier Chinese government, and a more stable global economy.

But that was putting the cart before the horse. We should have established solid, friendly relations first, then open up trade.



I think China is probably much strategically stronger than they were 40-50 years ago - and even back then they were still pretty strong. From the U.S. side, some are saying that the U.S. has given away too much and has been too deferent and conciliatory towards China for far too long, we've essentially created a monster.

Again, the irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife. After hearing capitalists, conservatives, and other Cold Warriors crow so much about so-called "Soviet expansionism," and how we should be sooooo scared of little island nations like Grenada, they ended up giving away the whole show to Communist China.



I don't think China would try any aggressive or expansionist wars at this point. Not that they couldn't win, but the costs would be enormous. All they would end up "winning" would be a radioactive junkpile.



I think it would be incredibly foolish for any of the three powers (Russia, USA, or China) to start any wars with each other. There's no particular reason for it. We have no territorial disputes to speak of, except perhaps maritime disputes along the Arctic Rim.

Regarding Trump, at least in terms of US relations with China, there has been a noticeable undercurrent in US public opinion which has been mistrustful of China and still sees them somewhat as a Cold War adversary. The same can be observed regarding US perceptions of Russia. The only real difference is that the Chinese Communist government has remained in power continuously and uninterrupted, whereas Russia has undergone extensive internal changes since the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

I always thought that was pretty strange, since Russia stopped being communist, yet it didn't matter to the US government; they were still the bad guys in their eyes. Yet China remained communist, and our government warmed up to them more and more. A lot of Americans also thought it strange at the time, but they were drowned out and ignored by the shrill calls for globalism and free trade. Still, it led to this undercurrent of opinion which has been smoldering under the surface for quite some time, and Trump appears to be feeding from that for support.

China also has problems, particularly a PR problem - not unlike Trump. There are Chinese people in Taiwan and Hong Kong who show open disdain for the Chinese government and its leaders. I remember when some NBA team official made a tweet about Hong Kong, and the Chinese government was so upset about it. They come across as highly sensitive and overreact to the slightest little criticisms. It's hard to figure them out at times.

It is true that American find it hard to figure out the Chinese... but then they don't really try the just shout louder.
China is actually very straight forward and they act in much the same way they did a thousand years ago.
They think and plan very long term.

You might think that they are Communist but they are now a complete hybrid. They out capitalist America when it comes to trade an commerce. their private companies are enormous conglomerates. and the owners are vastly wealthy, yet they must work within the restrains of and for the benefit of China.
If they do not do so or are caught in corruption... that is the end however powerful they think they are.
Trump thinks he invented the America first concept. it was just a watered down copy of what China has always done.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It is true that American find it hard to figure out the Chinese... but then they don't really try the just shout louder.
China is actually very straight forward and they act in much the same way they did a thousand years ago.
They think and plan very long term.

The world has changed quite a bit in a thousand years. Besides, some of their planning didn't always work out for them. They've had some pretty rough patches to go through during their history, like the Opium Wars, Boxer Rebellion, multiple civil wars, Japanese expansionism - all indicators of extremely bad planning. These may have been harsh lessons for them which might color their view of themselves and the world around them today.

You might think that they are Communist but they are now a complete hybrid. They out capitalist America when it comes to trade an commerce. their private companies are enormous conglomerates. and the owners are vastly wealthy, yet they must work within the restrains of and for the benefit of China.

On the subject of planning ahead, we Americans have been notoriously bad planners. On the other hand, we never really had to "plan" anything, as much as we just had to watch the Soviet Bloc and China very closely and be able to react in case they attack something, either directly or by proxy.

Nixon thought that he could weaken the Soviet Union by warming up to Red China, which was actually a wise decision on its face, considering that it did indeed weaken the Soviet Bloc and isolated them even further. After Mao died, China appeared to be moving away from communism and becoming more capitalistic, which no doubt pleased many in the US who were still crowing about "evil empires" and worried about the communists gaining a foothold in Nicaragua and Grenada.

Meanwhile, the US capitalists had grown weary and upset at how much profits they were losing by having to pay American workers what they were worth, so they had been seeking out other options for cheaper labor. Thanks to the strength of labor unions and the improvements in the standard of living, Americans were definitely not going to go back to the days of sweatshops. American businesses hit upon "outsourcing" as the answer, since they could still exploit workers in other countries with friendly governments to make products to be sent to the US.

This was precisely the thing that Mao was against, and yet, the Chinese government got in on that action with reckless abandoning. They sold the labor of their billion-strong captive labor force, but in the process, the top leaders made themselves a boatload of money. Moreover, they also learned American production techniques, American technology, American industries - and now they are a major force to be reckoned with. Our own business leaders and political leaders gave it all to them on a silver platter.

China seems to be moving more in a nationalistic direction. Some nations might see China as an equalizer who might be able to stand up to US bullying, interventionism, and militarism around the world. Russia might have been seen that way at one time during the Cold War, but Russia ended up burning a lot of bridges to the point where few countries really trust them anymore. They also appear to be moving in a nationalistic direction. As such, I don't think we can see China and Russia becoming any more than allies of convenience, which will only become necessary if the US becomes even more aggressive than we have been.

Our best bet would be to shift the focus away from the Eastern Hemisphere and more on the Western Hemisphere. That's why I'm upset about Trump's wall more than anything else. We need to forge stronger ties with our neighbors to the south, try to make amends for what we've done to them in the past, and reconcile for mutual benefit and defense. That's the area where we are vulnerable, both diplomatically and strategically. It's America's "soft underbelly," and that's where we should focus.

If they do not do so or are caught in corruption... that is the end however powerful they think they are.
Trump thinks he invented the America first concept. it was just a watered down copy of what China has always done.

None of Trump's ideas are anything that he actually conceived of or thought of on his own. "America First" has been around since before even Trump was born, but it's been more in the background within the tapestry of divergence within the US political culture.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
In a war of the kind you're describing, the only "winners" would be those who are dead. The losers would still be alive.

I'm not sure about the scenario you're discussing. China has threatened Taiwan since 1949, so I can understand that part of it. But Guam? That's not the only US base in the west Pacific. They'd have to attack US bases in South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines, too.



I'm not sure why the possibility of war with China would increase with a trade war. If all they want to do is trade with us, then good relations are vital for a healthy trade relationship.

This has been the main problem from the very beginning in that US globalists believed that by opening China and trading with them more and more, it will lead to better relations, a friendlier Chinese government, and a more stable global economy.

But that was putting the cart before the horse. We should have established solid, friendly relations first, then open up trade.



I think China is probably much strategically stronger than they were 40-50 years ago - and even back then they were still pretty strong. From the U.S. side, some are saying that the U.S. has given away too much and has been too deferent and conciliatory towards China for far too long, we've essentially created a monster.

Again, the irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife. After hearing capitalists, conservatives, and other Cold Warriors crow so much about so-called "Soviet expansionism," and how we should be sooooo scared of little island nations like Grenada, they ended up giving away the whole show to Communist China.



I don't think China would try any aggressive or expansionist wars at this point. Not that they couldn't win, but the costs would be enormous. All they would end up "winning" would be a radioactive junkpile.



I think it would be incredibly foolish for any of the three powers (Russia, USA, or China) to start any wars with each other. There's no particular reason for it. We have no territorial disputes to speak of, except perhaps maritime disputes along the Arctic Rim.

Regarding Trump, at least in terms of US relations with China, there has been a noticeable undercurrent in US public opinion which has been mistrustful of China and still sees them somewhat as a Cold War adversary. The same can be observed regarding US perceptions of Russia. The only real difference is that the Chinese Communist government has remained in power continuously and uninterrupted, whereas Russia has undergone extensive internal changes since the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

I always thought that was pretty strange, since Russia stopped being communist, yet it didn't matter to the US government; they were still the bad guys in their eyes. Yet China remained communist, and our government warmed up to them more and more. A lot of Americans also thought it strange at the time, but they were drowned out and ignored by the shrill calls for globalism and free trade. Still, it led to this undercurrent of opinion which has been smoldering under the surface for quite some time, and Trump appears to be feeding from that for support.

China also has problems, particularly a PR problem - not unlike Trump. There are Chinese people in Taiwan and Hong Kong who show open disdain for the Chinese government and its leaders. I remember when some NBA team official made a tweet about Hong Kong, and the Chinese government was so upset about it. They come across as highly sensitive and overreact to the slightest little criticisms. It's hard to figure them out at times.
Yes. Most of the decisions about opening up trade were made with the best information available at the time, and so are the decisions we make now using the best information available. This makes us almost as inconsistent as the other nuclear empowered nations. I think we remain the most consistent despite our weird presidential election stream -- and it is weird. We're flip flopping quite a bit.

There is no winning strategy. With countries our size its mostly luck. In diplomacy its important to establish consistency, yet its important to react appropriately to change. We need to avoid short term thinking, but events happen in real time. Its unfortunate that the two chief goals are in conflict. The conflicting requirements make sure we employees of the world can't justify rapid raises at year's end.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes. Most of the decisions about opening up trade were made with the best information available at the time, and so are the decisions we make now using the best information available. This makes us almost as inconsistent as the other nuclear empowered nations. I think we remain the most consistent despite our weird presidential election stream -- and it is weird. We're flip flopping quite a bit.

I think opening trade was as much a matter of domestic politics as it was about foreign policy and opening up other markets. By the 1980s, the capitalists appeared to be growing more weary with the liberal, pro-labor types who dominated the political scene for the decades prior. Labor unions were stronger and workers in general had better protections than before. I think the capitalists had adopted a "screw you" attitude towards the workers that there was a bit of spite attached to what they were doing when they were shutting down factories and shipping jobs overseas. They would go on and on about how lazy, spoiled, and entitled the American workers are and how they're finding so many willing workers overseas willing to be paid pennies.

There is no winning strategy. With countries our size its mostly luck. In diplomacy its important to establish consistency, yet its important to react appropriately to change. We need to avoid short term thinking, but events happen in real time. Its unfortunate that the two chief goals are in conflict. The conflicting requirements make sure we employees of the world can't justify rapid raises at year's end.

I agree that we need to avoid short-term thinking, but that's been our main problem. I think what happened, as a result of WW2 and the US was thrusted into the role of world leader, we might have gotten in over our heads. Our country had been "isolationist" (for lack of a better term), and we just didn't have very much experience in dealing on the world stage. Our allies, Britain and France, had much more experience with the parts of the world which were suddenly coming into play, but they established a less than stellar reputation themselves - and were pretty much exhausted and broke after WW2.

I'm not sure what America's overall "goals" are anymore. At one point, our goal was to "make the world safe for democracy," and we seemed to have this idea of wanting fight for freedom against tyranny around the world. That seemed to fall by the wayside, or at least, it's treated more cynically these days. I wonder why.

Some say the actual goal has been economic in nature, to control governments and resources for the benefit and protection of US national interests. This, in part, explains why we supported so many corrupt, right-wing dictatorships around the world while claiming that it's all about protecting the "free world" from communism. But now, we can't even say that anymore, since Russia is no longer communist, and China is perceived as communist in name only.

While our previous strategy was ideologically-driven, the world has changed to such a degree that such a strategy is anachronistic. If our policy is more rooted in economics and national interests, as many people seem to believe, then that's how our strategy should be based. We should drop the "it's all about freedom" rhetoric, since nobody believes that anyway. Our strategy should be more practical and economically-based.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Fancy a Western Pacific war with China ?

I was reading today, on Google that in repeated American war game scenarios, that China would easily defeat any combination of American forces in the Western pacific and South China Sea.

Neither Guam nor Taiwan could be defended, and both would fall to superior Chinese forces.

That such information “True or False” should be leaked or made available, strongly suggests that the USA wants to mobilise American public opinion towards a massive build up of American forces and the supply of advanced weaponry.

It seems china has a considerable superiority in Ultra speed long range missiles, capable of seven times the speed of sound, for the guided attack of shipping, both from land bases and artificial islands.

Trump has announced that America is developing an extraordinarily super fast missile 14 times faster.???

I would suggest that the preparations for such a war is already in progress. Which would account for the attack on Chinese companies like Huawei and the now almost total ban on the supply of Chips made with American supplied technology and software. And the attempt to stop the supply of advanced telecom Equipment from Huawei and other major Chinese companies to the world markets. Trumps policies and trade war with China, is similar to that of America against Japan prior to WW2. Such trade wars and denials of trade equality have lead to many wars in the past.

The major flaw in this American strategy is that this will energise China to mobilise some of its vast resources toward replacing any such equipment with home developed alternatives. Something it has resited doing because of the worlds need for so few of these chip making machines to meet demand. Huawei on the other hand has been attacked on the grounds that it might be possible to put back doors into their advanced world leading 5G technology. All with out any proof that they have ever done so.

If China considers itself to be in a war situation it will have no compunction about using any intellectual property software or patented devices it may require.

However its past record would suggest that it has no need of outside help in developing even the most sophisticated technology, at break neck speed.

War or not, This American war like Strategy will very soon leave China and its leading Technology companies. In a world domination position in virtually every Technological field. And companies like Huawei in a virtual monopoly positions.

China already dominates world supply In the fields of telecommunication, smart phones and volume chip production. It is only in the fields of popular communication software, now dominated by Google, and in 5nm chips, that it has fallen behind, as up till now they were readily available on the world markets. It is inconceivable that China will not catch up and overtake existing suppliers in very short order indeed, now that they are forced to do so by the new American policies.

China’s main technological competitors, South Korea, and Japan would not stand in the way of a dominant China and would almost certainly, either remain neutral or switch sides in any any outright trade or active war, or suffer the inevitable fallout.

Europe, Africa and the Middle East are already turning to China as their major trade partner. And Americas influence in the world is dwindling. Perhaps only maintained to any extent at all, by the Nato alliance against Russia. Russia remains a force with in Europe through its dominant energy position. It is no longer a serious military threat. Russia would undoubtedly favour China against America in any global war situation.

Trump has undoubtedly misjudged the true world situation, and Americas ability to control it.

The USA remains a “Player” but no longer dominates politically, militarily or in trade.
the US would lose a war with China, considering the only way it would happen is if America goes to China and starts one. The Chinese have a powerful military, but it's very limited in terms of force projection. America has a technological edge you say? Well that may have been true once, but if there isn't parity, the gap is closing fast. America definitely had a technological edge on North Vietnam, and look how that turned out. And that was against a poor country with a small population. China is loaded, and outnumber Americans 5:1. The Germans had a technological edge on the Russians, too, and their experience should give some idea of what happens when you fight someone who massively outnumbers you at the end of your supply lines.

Fortunately, with the exception of Tibet, the Chinese don't really think in expansionst terms. They're more than happy projecting "soft power", they want influence and hegemony, but they don't want military annexation.
 
Last edited:

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
America needs to continue to trade. And to do so needs to sell what China wants and in exchange can buy what ever China agrees to trade.. it is always a two way business.
Good trading conditions make conflict very difficult which would otherwiseh hurt both sides.
There is no good reason for the present American policies. Except internal ones.

The problems were certainly not instigated by China.
It is certainly not anything to do with spying or trade espionage which is a forever process, and carried out by all nations. The USA even spies on its friends, including Canada the UK France and Germany. And I am sure that we do the same.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
the US would lose a war with China, considering the only way it would happen is if America goes to China and starts one. The Chinese have a powerful military, but it's very limited in terms of force projection. America has a technological edge you say? Well that may have been true once, but if there isn't parity, the gap is closing fast. America definitely had a technological edge on North Vietnam, and look how that turned out. And that was against a poor country with a small population. China is loaded, and outnumber Americans 5:1. The Germans had a technological edge on the Russians, too, and their experience should give some idea of what happens when you fight someone who massively outnumbers you at the end of your supply lines.

Fortunately, with the exception of Tibet, the Chinese don't really think in expansist terms. They're more than happy projecting "soft power", the want influence and hegemony, but they don't want military annexation.

I agree but do not under estimate China's military and space technology.
It is capable of targeting, hitting and sinking any ship virtually anywhere in the world.

It is true that it has a small navy, but it only needs sufficient to operate at a local skirmish level.

Whereas It is able to target American Super Carriers and capital ships anywhere, directly from China and it's man made islands.
 
Last edited:

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
America needs to continue to trade. And to do so needs to sell what China wants and in exchange can buy what ever China agrees to trade.. it is always a two way business.
Good trading conditions make conflict very difficult which would otherwiseh hurt both sides.
There is no good reason for the present American policies. Except internal ones.

The problems were certainly not instigated by China.
It is certainly not anything to do with spying or trade espionage which is a forever process, and carried out by all nations. The USA even spies on its friends, including Canada the UK France and Germany. And I am sure that we do the same.

I don't think China instigated the problems. I think the U.S. has had a checkered past in China just as with many other nations.

Still, I think despite anything else that's been happening, our relationship is still salvageable, but it depends on both sides acting like civilized adults and reaching a compromise.

Part of it might mean having to yield some of the global hegemony with Russia and China and agreeing to more of a regional power system. Each major power would have its own sphere of influence and responsibility for maintaining stability and order. Right now, it seems like every nation is competing for the whole world, and it brings about too much chaos, instability, and dissension.

Small fry nations like Iran and North Korea would not be a problem at all if we agreed on a unified strategy. The only reason most problems crop up in the world is because the small fry are able to play the major powers off against each other. If we can actually agree to not let that happen anymore, we can have a much more peaceful world.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
I don't think China instigated the problems. I think the U.S. has had a checkered past in China just as with many other nations.

Still, I think despite anything else that's been happening, our relationship is still salvageable, but it depends on both sides acting like civilized adults and reaching a compromise.

Part of it might mean having to yield some of the global hegemony with Russia and China and agreeing to more of a regional power system. Each major power would have its own sphere of influence and responsibility for maintaining stability and order. Right now, it seems like every nation is competing for the whole world, and it brings about too much chaos, instability, and dissension.

Small fry nations like Iran and North Korea would not be a problem at all if we agreed on a unified strategy. The only reason most problems crop up in the world is because the small fry are able to play the major powers off against each other. If we can actually agree to not let that happen anymore, we can have a much more peaceful world.

Very difficult to argue with that. But I can not see the likes of Trump going down a route like that. As long as he believes that America is all powerful. The bully in him will out.
 
Top