China and war

[GGizmo]

In my opinion neither the US or China can invade the other.

We know from history that big countries get their butt handed to them, Germany overran the USSR (Russia), and Japan overrun China.

So the US wouldn't be able to invade China in my opinion. But if there was a country nearby who could, maybe India (as India was one of the only countries in that part of the world not to sign that boot licking letter to China about great human rights) then the US/Allied forces could provide air support.

Of course, it wouldn't just be the US in this war. I suspect by the time it comes around it'll be the Five Eyes countries (US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), the European Union with all its connections, and any other allied country. I wouldn't be so sure that Russia will be rushing to China's aid either as Russia is aware of China's actions too.

Also people are forgetting our British history. How do we think 'Little Britain' ruled most of the world? It's not about the size of the country or population. Big countries and populations can be a liability in war. It'll all depends how it kicks off.

Sadly war is good for the economy. Build more ships, planes, missles etc. All more jobs for the common man and woman. There will probably be new technology used that we might not have publically heard about before come in to action.

Naomi Chomsky said in one of the videos that I posted that the Americans actually thought the Germans would win, and that they were planning to divide the World up between themselves and Germany, with the U.S. controlling much of the West and Germany controlling much of the East.

And he thinks Hitler would want to share with the US?

 

[alchal]

The Americans couldn't even win a ground war in Vietnam and they were bare foot, invading China would be suicide.

Have they ever fought a enemy that's equivalent in size and technology?

The biggest threat to America is internal conflict.

Having said that, who knows what biological weapons both sides have. Maybe covid was just a test to see how well a spreading vehicle might work, and they could add a more deadly payload if they wanted to wage war.

The north Vietnamese were not bare foot,they were well drilled and equipped for the task.
Modern air to air,tanks,RPGs galore..ak-47 was a much better weapon than the M16 at the time of introduction in that climate etc.
They lost due to the anti war movement back home.

Military wise they were on course untill the bombing campaign got wound down due to public pressure.

Either way I wouldn't use Vietnam as an example.

As for China,take away the nukes and the only advantage they would have is numbers and lots of diesel subs.

 

[Doobedoo]

And he thinks Hitler would want to share with the US?

It’s not something he’s made up it’s come from internal documents as far as I’m aware but you can follow that up yourself.

But yeah enemies have shared interests too and will happily work together if they think it would benefit themselves or their agendas.

 

[ianh]

Th exercise will be good for the F35 fleet in particular but it won't be any kind of genuinely "threatening" message to Beijing in any way.

I'm more concerned about our own willingness and/or ability to run things with proper capabilities than a Chinese sub or anti-ship missile.

A couple of Type 45s should be able to protect it pretty well.

The problem has always been "numbers", you can have the best missile shield in the world but once you run out of missiles its worthless. So all the Chinese need to do is fire more cheap, easy to make anti-ship missiles than the task forces has "anti-missile" missiles and China wins, it's that simple. That is why the USN is heavily going into "no ammo needed" Laser tech to defeat missiles right now.

 

[neocon]

Just heard Bernard Jenkins in an interview, sounds like he wants a total decoupling of China from the UK.

 

[neocon]

Th exercise will be good for the F35 fleet in particular but it won't be any kind of genuinely "threatening" message to Beijing in any way.





The problem has always been "numbers", you can have the best missile shield in the world but once you run out of missiles its worthless. So all the Chinese need to do is fire more cheap, easy to make anti-ship missiles than the task forces has "anti-missile" missiles and China wins, it's that simple. That is why the USN is heavily going into "no ammo needed" Laser tech to defeat missiles right now.

Do you think any possess a weapon that doesn't require delivery, a kind of suicide bomb, which if detonated would indirectly make the world uninhabitable?

 

[Roar87]

The problem has always been "numbers", you can have the best missile shield in the world but once you run out of missiles its worthless. So all the Chinese need to do is fire more cheap, easy to make anti-ship missiles than the task forces has "anti-missile" missiles and China wins, it's that simple. That is why the USN is heavily going into "no ammo needed" Laser tech to defeat missiles right now.

The thought within the US Navy is that you disrupt the kill chain before they get to the point of firing the missiles. You don't need to shoot down missiles if you take out the part of the chain that involves targetting them for instance, Carriers actually move quite quickly when it comes to hitting them in the sea with a missile, you only need to disrupt their targetting slightly and it completely negates their ability to hit you. I think people under estimate how far ahead the US is when it comes to war fighting. They've been spending more money than the next 10 countries combined for decades, they've fought more wars in recent years than almost anyone (alongside other Western nations), I can't imagine how much time and money they have dedicated to military planning and what a war with China would look like and what they need to do to win.

 

[Hagar]

There won't be a hot war, probably not a cold war. China needs to feed it's population and work its industries. It knows which side it's bread is buttered and who pays it's bills. Mao and the cultural revolution would not be possible today.

A few sharp words, an exchange of political statements and business as usual.

 

[neocon]

The thought within the US Navy is that you disrupt the kill chain before they get to the point of firing the missiles. You don't need to shoot down missiles if you take out the part of the chain that involves targetting them for instance, Carriers actually move quite quickly when it comes to hitting them in the sea with a missile, you only need to disrupt their targetting slightly and it completely negates their ability to hit you. I think people under estimate how far ahead the US is when it comes to war fighting. They've been spending more money than the next 10 countries combined for decades, they've fought more wars in recent years than almost anyone (alongside other Western nations), I can't imagine how much time and money they have dedicated to military planning and what a war with China would look like and what they need to do to win.

What's the gain to fighting a sea battle in the South China sea? If you can't realistically invade and conquer China, what's the point? I mean there's no land to take control of, except perhaps Taiwan.

 

[RxR]

A hot war with China would probably interfere with my new hearing aid - Australia being a bit closer to any prospective front - so I'm against it.

Edit. Which of course means we need to better prepare for it imo at full speed, absolutely, it being good for employment and prevention.

 

[neocon]

A hot war with China would probably interfere with my new hearing aid - Australia being a bit closer to any prospective front - so I'm against it.

Edit. Which of course means we need to better prepare for it imo at full speed, absolutely, it being good for employment and prevention.

I think the idea that we are going to become industrial again is laughable. Unless those jobs pay high salaries that is. We've dug ourselves into a deep hole in the West.

I was watching one of those Ted talks on China, they can build a bridge in less than 24 hours and in the West we take literally 5 years or something. That was an example a speaker gave.

Perhaps if we return to the days of slavery we might stand a chance.

 

[Hagar]

I think the idea that we are going to become industrial again is laughable. Unless those jobs pay high salaries that is. We've dug ourselves into a deep hole in the West.

We can do but as you say we will not. Which is why we need China but equally China needs the West for our rich markets to purchase their wares. Without our markets they are a peasant economy based on subsistence agriculture where the majority of their people still work.

 

[StriderX]

Industry is reducing globally, there's no point in pretending we can return to the heavy industries of the 1950s and earlier. It's going the way of agriculture in terms of employment, if it's going to come back to the UK it will be increasingly automated to compete on productivity, so the jobs will be limited even if we did have it back.

With fertility rates dropping like nothing else, there doesn't appear to be growth for it, not unless Africa has a serious increase in living standards. Even if they did, it'd still be better for companies to make the goods in Africa rather than here.

Besides that, I've been wondering lately why Beijing didn't or doesn't attempt to pretend it's a democracy by emulating Russia?

 

[Doobedoo]

We can do but as you say we will not. Which is why we need China but equally China needs the West for our rich markets to purchase their wares. Without our markets they are a peasant economy based on subsistence agriculture where the majority of their people still work.

We only need China so that American multinational corporations can benefit from the abundance of cheap labour to manufacture its good to sell to us for huge profits. That’s it.

50% of the Worlds economy is generated by American Corporations they need cheap labour and Government subsidies to maintain and increase that percentage. This whole China and Russia is a threat is a ruse its to keep you looking in the places that don’t matter so that others can continue to benefit.

 

[ubersonic]

What do you think the Chinese will do in response to the Huawei decision?

Bigger question will be what will the world do in response.

For years now it's been a meme that the UK is the 51st US state, but by dancing to Trump's tune on this we have effectively announced to the whole planet that we're just a puppet which will do whatever nonsense uncle Sam demands. This isn't good considering in mere months our transitional period leaving the EU will end and for the first time in almost half a century we will be alone in the world. Now as countries line up to take advantage of us we don't even have strength of conviction to fall back on after breaking our agreements with Huawei just to please Trump, and there's no way he will help us get good deals from countries we try to negotiate with

 

[alchal]

Industry is reducing globally, there's no point in pretending we can return to the heavy industries of the 1950s and earlier. It's going the way of agriculture in terms of employment, if it's going to come back to the UK it will be increasingly automated to compete on productivity, so the jobs will be limited even if we did have it back.

With fertility rates dropping like nothing else, there doesn't appear to be growth for it, not unless Africa has a serious increase in living standards. Even if they did, it'd still be better for companies to make the goods in Africa rather than here.

Besides that, I've been wondering lately why Beijing didn't or doesn't attempt to pretend it's a democracy by emulating Russia?

Harder to emulate with the one party state that is the norm over there.

Russia started of down the democracy path before Putin hijacked it,once he croaks it or runs of with his billions then it can revert back to some kind of democracy (hopefully and hopefully soon)

 

[alchal]

Bigger question will be what will the world do in response.

For years now it's been a meme that the UK is the 51st US state, but by dancing to Trump's tune on this we have effectively announced to the whole planet that we're just a puppet which will do whatever nonsense uncle Sam demands. This isn't good considering in mere months our transitional period leaving the EU will end and for the first time in almost half a century we will be alone in the world. Now as countries line up to take advantage of us we don't even have strength of conviction to fall back on after breaking our agreements with Huawei just to please Trump, and there's no way he will help us get good deals from countries we try to negotiate with

Honestly....?
Brexit ....wrong thread.

So you trust Huawei? Plenty of countries do not,what happens if Germany also stop work with them will they be tared with the same brush?

Guess all the experts on security must be getting paid by trump.

 

[Nasher]

Huawei and Lenovo equipment has already been banned for years for government use. The MOD etc aren't allowed to purchase any of it and any existing equipment was binned.

GCHQ have suspected China of hiding dodgy stuff in the hardware for ages. If they suspect something and went to those lengths (and cost) to get rid of it, then there probably is something...

 

[Smokey Deza]

What's the gain to fighting a sea battle in the South China sea? If you can't realistically invade and conquer China, what's the point? I mean there's no land to take control of, except perhaps Taiwan.

Critical trade region, plus lots of goodies under the seabed.

They're not looking for a fight, just securing what is 'theirs'

 

[Malevolence]

If Huawei is a private company, as they claim to be, then why is the CPC so butthurt about this?