It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

War: Can China take Russia with 200 million men?

page: 10
1
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by rogue1
Well when you try and allude to them as fact, yes you should.


Really as fact now?

"""while the new one was suppose to have been cut in half according to internet chatter."""

Where did i say it was factual information


You try an present it as fact. So you admit all your information is unendo and internet rumour, hardly reliable.




Erm, yes you are wrong, these missile were developed in the 1970's, decades ago, you can count can't you
The Russians haven't produced any liquid fuelld ICBM's since the 1980's.


That would imply that liquid fueled missiles were discarded from service which i have proven you wrong

"The fact remains that liquid fuel was discarded by the US, USSR, UK and France decades ago."


Hmm, so a few antiquated SOviet missiles being used pretty much emans liquid fuel has been discarded. All their models in teh last 20 years have been solid fuel, ao....







Sure very easy, you could hvae course just googled the information and you would hvae found any number of sites confirming what I said
But if I must ....for teh brain dead.


I went to that very same site to find out which liquid fueled missiles in russian service. That site gives a guessimate according to START II treaties on how much missiles in russian service. You would also find out if you look up more that the SS-18 and SS-19 missiles have been put in reserve while the SS-25 missiles were decommisoned


Hmm don't know where you got your information form once again no lnk, but as usual you are wrong - how surprising. This from 2006, hang on wait.....that's this year, lol.


The number of road-mobile SS-25s continues to gradually decrease from a peak of 360 a few years ago to the 291 now deployed at nine locations. The single-warhead SS-25 entered service in 1985, and its service life may have to be extended due to the slow introduction of the Topol-M1

www.thebulletin.org...


Now a word of advice, if you want to flat out lie about something, don't kake so obvious that any website will prove you wrong.


One good thing about liquid fuel rockets is they dont keep the fuel inside the body until they are lanuched while solid fueled rockets are normally already fueled which gives liquid fueled rockets a longer service life. And if you did some research the russians are planning to recommison/already done so some more SS-19 in service


Complete bollox, you use your own logic again to make completely false statements. The Minutemans have been around for decades and they are reliable and yes they have solid fuel.




One thing you learn is to look between the lines. So they dont mention the range so its not there?. There are numerous sources about the PLA 2nd artillery, you can see the size of each district and see where one entrance starts and the other finishes. Simple maths for me


LMAO, oh right, so you're privvy to these secret maps. This is just getting ridiculous




And if you want to calulate the amount of tunnels linking PLA bases together, ill to give you a clue that the great majority of PLA bases have a underground conponent left behind from the mao era.

Tunnels where a big part of peoples war in china during the cultural revolution and throughout the begining of the PRC to 1979. 30,000 miles of tunnels is a small estimate


LOL, feel free to fantasize, but I and everyone who reads your posts knows you're making it up. Go and BS to someone else. You hvae ABSOLUTELY nothing to support your claims. As usual you are making things up, NO PROOF, No INFORMATION on what you base your assumptions on. Then youthow in something which is so far removed from yr claims it is worthless.



It will be a old day in hell, when you actually produce facts to back yourself up


Like how you change course everything you been proven wrong. Like your original comment

"""If any of these powers so chose to attack CHina tomorrow, the DF-5's would be destroyed long before they could be fuelled.""""""

Which my source proved wrong

Moreover, one would destroy less than 300 meters of a tunnel using three warheads. Assuming the underground tunnel network under the Tai-Hei Mountain Range is only 1,000 kilometer long, one would need to use 10,000 (ten thousand) 500-kiloton warheads in order to make sure the tunnel network is completely destroyed. This is the VERY unlikely case in which you know the exact layout of the entire tunnel network. AND this is just one of several missile sites in China.


Don't know if your a dummy or not, I'm kind of leading towards yes. The DF_5's are silo based, they ARE NOT kept in any tunnels - how many times to I hvae to say it. Any site will tell you that. The DF-5's weigh sme 200 tons and are definately not mobile

This is like your previous posts about altitude in relation to lift, completely wrong, but yet you just keep banging away as though the laws of physcs will change if you persist with bogus claims long enough.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by rogue1]




posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 12:27 AM
link   
I would be impressed if China took on Russia and we had the battle to end all battles for communist supremecy. That would be great and the west could sit back and watch them self-destruct. When is it going to happen?



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
You try an present it as fact. So you admit all your information is unendo and internet rumour, hardly reliable.


REPOST since its not getting though your head or your trying to change the subject as you always do

Really as fact now?

"""while the new one was suppose to have been cut in half according to internet chatter."""

Where did i say it was factual information?



Hmm, so a few antiquated SOviet missiles being used pretty much emans liquid fuel has been discarded. All their models in teh last 20 years have been solid fuel, ao..


Contray to your orignal statment

"The fact remains that liquid fuel was discarded by the US, USSR, UK and France decades ago."

These antiquated soviet missiles hold more than 70% of russian warheads. Why dont they decom all of them?. Even though in your own source it clearly states the amount of warheads per missile you now insist that they are less important?



Now a word of advice, if you want to flat out lie about something, don't kake so obvious that any website will prove you wrong.


Kiddo,

You actually think i'll claim that the russians put most of their ICBMs in reserve or got decomed?.....I gave you to much credit so i assumed you understood what we were talking about just one post before hand. I assumed wrong

You missed the point, I was saying that the SS-19s and SS-18s that were taken off the list on your website were put in reserve while the SS-25 that were taken off the list were decomed.

I have to give you credit MS, You like to jump up in the air when you think you caught someone. Childish behaviour,


Complete bollox, you use your own logic again to make completely false statements.


You challenge this then?



The Minutemans have been around for decades and they are reliable and yes they have solid fuel.


Why are we comparing a american missile to a russian missile?. You do know that the SS-25 are always moblie in moblie lanuchers ever since they were produced (the ones being deommmed since your jump on this one to). I sure as hell know th russians and americans practise very different kinds of missile lanuchs

You like to compare the service life of a Mig-29 and F-16 to now?. or the engine lift of the AL-31 or F-100 because their both turbofan engines? or the F-414 and RD-33

Thats about a 300 hour to 1500 hour difference (They are rough figures off my head if you plan to jump on this one to)



LMAO, oh right, so you're privvy to these secret maps. This is just getting ridiculous


GoogleEarth and google security. Not to secret


LOL, feel free to fantasize, but I and everyone who reads your posts knows you're making it up. Go and BS to someone else. You hvae ABSOLUTELY nothing to support your claims. As usual you are making things up, NO PROOF, No INFORMATION on what you base your assumptions on. Then youthow in something which is so far removed from yr claims it is worthless.


First sign your losing is when you use personal attacks. And attacking my absence of sources while you haven't even provided one to debuke me?. Let the stream out

Maybe wreak this account and make another account like you did before?

-------

Even though i provided a link stating where the tunnel network is located and gave you a reason why china had such a extensive network of tunnels you still dispute the fact.

Maybe rogue1, You can stop talking and accept the fact that you cant find anything on google that disputes the fact or you cant come of with a reason why Mao wouldn't ahve built all those tunnels in the 60s and 70s


Don't know if your a dummy or not, I'm kind of leading towards yes. The DF_5's are silo based, they ARE NOT kept in any tunnels - how many times to I hvae to say it. Any site will tell you that. The DF-5's weigh sme 200 tons and are definately not mobile


Now they dont use tunnels?. Get your story straight

200 TONS


Enjoy


Even though my article mentioned specifically mentioned tunnels and silos, im surprised your still disputing this. The DF-5 was firstly deployed in caves and moved out from tunnels


Initially the DF-5 was deployed in a similar style as the DF-4 long-range ballistic missile. The missile was stored in a horizontal position in tunnels under high mountains, and are launched immediately outside the mouth of the tunnel.

Link



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 04:00 AM
link   
speaking hidden tunnels, I've actually been to one of them when I was very young, like 8-9 years old.
the tunnel used to store explosives, in the 60s and later turned publicly open (due to the expansion the city near by). It was HUGE!!! you talk inside it for miles, and has like hundreds of chambers, and the entrance is so stealth it would be impossible to find with out someone knowing it.

there are still a lot of secret tunnels exist, and are highly stealthy. Most are built during the 60s part of the People's Defence Project.
I really don't think the DF-5 are going to be destroyed before they had a chance to launch, because russia/america doesn't know where these missiles are (they don't even know how many are there)

Unless, they sent some sort of spys, then that's a whole different story.

I agree that DF-5 is not as advanced as the Peacemakers, but still, enough to wipe out some cities.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 04:00 AM
link   
And I doubt any country in the world has the ability to shoot these missiles down,

'cause those so called the anti missile system doesn't work.

the Americans can't really do it, and I doubt whether the russians are any better.

PLAsa has tried to build that type of thing too, called the "sky net system", but I truely believe it's nothing more than some fancy term for garbage.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
You missed the point, I was saying that the SS-19s and SS-18s that were taken off the list on your website were put in reserve while the SS-25 that were taken off the list were decomed.


Erm no, reread your posts, unless you've already edited them. You said all teh SS-25's were decommisioned, they clearly weren't. As for SS-19's in storage there are about 30 of them
and no SS-18's they are being destroyed.





Why are we comparing a american missile to a russian missile?. You do know that the SS-25 are always moblie in moblie lanuchers ever since they were produced (the ones being deommmed since your jump on this one to). I sure as hell know th russians and americans practise very different kinds of missile lanuchs


Why
because you said liquid fulled missiles last longer than solid fuel ones, you were clearly wrong, simple as that.



LMAO, oh right, so you're privvy to these secret maps. This is just getting ridiculous


GoogleEarth and google security. Not to secret


LOL, so google earth has ground penetrating radar or X-Ray vision now ? I fnot then how the hell would you know wherea tunnel went, if in fact there even is a tunnel. Once again you make things up.



First sign your losing is when you use personal attacks. And attacking my absence of sources while you haven't even provided one to debuke me?. Let the stream out


LOL personal attacks, haha, almost every one of your posts contains one - LOL.



Even though i provided a link stating where the tunnel network is located and gave you a reason why china had such a extensive network of tunnels you still dispute the fact.


Um yeah right, your link provides no information let alone these ridiculous claims if a network 30 000 miles long, this is your own personal fantasy not fact.


Maybe rogue1, You can stop talking and accept the fact that you cant find anything on google that disputes the fact or you cant come of with a reason why Mao wouldn't ahve built all those tunnels in the 60s and 70s


LOL and you have nothng to support anything you say. I could say the US has 50 000 miles of underground tunnels - can you find anything to dispute that ? didn't think so. Your argument is stupid.



Now they dont use tunnels?. Get your story straight

200 TONS


Enjoy


HAHA, LMAO, sp not only do they have to fuel them they have to put them together, LOL. WHich is exactly why they use silos now and not tunnels
They do weigh around 200 tons which is why they are disasembled and have to be driven around on seeral massive vehicles.



Even though my article mentioned specifically mentioned tunnels and silos, im surprised your still disputing this. The DF-5 was firstly deployed in caves and moved out from tunnels


Oh right, so....they hvae silos in tunnels, what ar ethey going to do shoot them into the roof of the tunnel




Initially the DF-5 was deployed in a similar style as the DF-4 long-range ballistic missile. The missile was stored in a horizontal position in tunnels under high mountains, and are launched immediately outside the mouth of the tunnel.

Link


NOw this is funny, it says initially LOL. you know why because they hadn't built silos yet. What's the point of having these missiles if you have to assemble them before you can use them, your coutries already a wasteland. Sitting in caves disassembled means they have no deterrance value let alone being able to respond to a hostile launch. You love to show your lack of knowlege - I'm through educating you though.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
One good thing about liquid fuel rockets is they dont keep the fuel inside the body until they are lanuched while solid fueled rockets are normally already fueled which gives liquid fueled rockets a longer service life. And if you did some research the russians are planning to recommison/already done so some more SS-19 in service


Wrong. Liquid rocket fuel is highly corrosive, so liquid-fuelled rockets in actual fact have a shorter life span and require more maintenance.

Added to which is the fact that handling liquid rocket fuel is an extremely hazardous occupation and liquid-fuelled rockets are routinely fuelled and drained. It's called drilling. Otherwise, come a shooting war your techs won't have any experience.




Moreover, one would destroy less than 300 meters of a tunnel using three warheads. Assuming the underground tunnel network under the Tai-Hei Mountain Range is only 1,000 kilometer long, one would need to use 10,000 (ten thousand) 500-kiloton warheads in order to make sure the tunnel network is completely destroyed. This is the VERY unlikely case in which you know the exact layout of the entire tunnel network. AND this is just one of several missile sites in China.


Also wrong. You don't need to collapse the entire tunnel network, just the entrance. And for a little precedent try looking up what 617 squadron did to the Saumar railway tunnel in France.

Besides which, a nuke going off outside the tunnel entrance and penetrating the tunnel entrance will cook everything inside the tunnel. All that oxygen contained in an enclosed space, hello blast furnace. Assuming, of course, that anything survived the sudden over-pressure wave that would travel the length of the tunnel.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Thanks for excludng two parts of my post which you were proven wrong


This reminds me of the last time we met. You couldn't even sleep and woke up in the early morning to reply. LOL




NOw this is funny, it says initially LOL. you know why because they hadn't built silos yet. What's the point of having these missiles if you have to assemble them before you can use them, your coutries already a wasteland. Sitting in caves disassembled means they have no deterrance value let alone being able to respond to a hostile launch. You love to show your lack of knowlege


Your lack of knowledge is astouding

Trust me mad scientist, i know a lot more about the chinese military than you would. First you insult me by talking about something you dont even know then you go on to ramble about something you just made up. It you didn't know you could have read more BOOKS. NOT INTERNET SITES. Second of all, if your going to insult someone you better know that your right before you insult them.

I would go on to add my words about chinas missiles but the link below sums it up perfectly



Retaliatory—Rather than Denial—Deterrence[5]

Many Chinese cite Deng Xiaoping when explaining China's nuclear thinking. He explained, in a meeting with foreigners in 1983:

"While you have some deterrence force, we also have some; but we don't want much. It will do just to possess it. Things like strategic weapons and deterrence forces are there to scare others. They must not be used first. But our possession will have some effect. The limited possession of nuclear weapons itself exert some pressure. It remains our position that we will develop a little (nuclear weapons). But the development will be limited. We have said repeatedly that our small amount (of nuclear weapons) is nothing. It is only to show that we also have what you have. If you want to destroy us, you yourself have to suffer some punishment at the same time."[6]

Deng’s statement echoed Mao’s nuclear thinking in several aspects:

1. Nuclear weapons are desirable only for its deterrent value, not for battlefield utility.
2. Nuclear weapons, if ever used, will be used to cause the enemy as much pain as possible, so as to enhance its deterrent value in the first place. Therefore, China has to adopt counter-value as opposed to counterforce targeting strategies, in order to strengthen its deterrence posture.
3. Only a small number of nuclear weapons will satisfy China’s deterrent needs—to convince potential nuclear adversary of a possible nuclear retaliation. Both Mao and Deng are very explicit that the deterrent effectiveness does not increase in proportion with numbers of nuclear weapons. A survivable and invulnerable small arsenal can be equally effective in terms of deterrence. Deterrence effect depends on invulnerability to nuclear strikes, not on large amount of nuclear attack capabilities. Accordingly, what China has been seeking is a nuclear arsenal that is small in size but good in quality.
4. As confined by its adherence to NFU policy, China has to focus its nuclear development efforts on “seclond strike capabilities” which must be credible and survivable in order to have deterrent effect.

Link


Originally posted by rogue1
Erm no, reread your posts, unless you've already edited them. You said all teh SS-25's were decommisioned, they clearly weren't. As for SS-19's in storage there are about 30 of them
and no SS-18's they are being destroyed.


I'm not wrong so why would i edit them out

I was refering to the website you posted with the figures of SS-25 missiles and SS-18 and SS-19s. I thought you would be smart enough to fgue it out since it was mentioned in the post just a few above. Guess i have to explain everything to you.

I'm just wondering why you would think that i would claim all SS-25 missiles were taken out of service since (like you link stated) they make up the majority of russian missiles. I have to give you more credit than that, you are a fiesty one


Why
because you said liquid fulled missiles last longer than solid fuel ones, you were clearly wrong, simple as that.


If liquid missiles are not kept on standby which they were not. Your situation would be pausible if the russians were going to use them as a retaliatory action which wouldn't seem likey as they are armed with 10 MIVR warheads.

Liquid fueled like HR said is alot more corrosive than solid fuel but it was not kept in the rockets until lift off


LOL, so google earth has ground penetrating radar or X-Ray vision now ?


Simple logic i would think. Entrance A to entrance B............. Why would i claim or even try to presaude you i had X-ray vision. You post are full of sarcasm or just plain stupidity



LOL personal attacks, haha, almost every one of your posts contains one - LOL.


You like to find to one attack in every post for 40% of my post?.

Actually make that a bet, If you do ill leave ATS for good, If you dont you can leave?. You game. If you want to acuse someone of something you better be backing that up.


Um yeah right, your link provides no information let alone these ridiculous claims if a network 30 000 miles long, this is your own personal fantasy not fact.


You can do maths cant you?

He mentioned where th location of tunnels lead to. Also if you want to check the beijing tunnel system they have a lot more than one path and webs out. I find it hard to believe that it would be 30,000miles of tunnels considering the amount of tunnels china was digging since the first sino-japanese war. Once china-defense is back on-line ill try find the picture of a PLA munitions tunnel and show you the size of it



LOL and you have nothng to support anything you say. I could say the US has 50 000 miles of underground tunnels - can you find anything to dispute that ? didn't think so. Your argument is stupid.


Why would i dispute that?.


HAHA, LMAO, sp not only do they have to fuel them they have to put them together, LOL. WHich is exactly why they use silos now and not tunnels
They do weigh around 200 tons which is why they are disasembled and have to be driven around on seeral massive vehicles.


Several as defined by dictionary.com

Being of a number more than two or three but not many


Several would imply more than two

The tunnels are not there to launch a missile but hat move the missiles around to change position so that the US does not have a proper idea of where the missiles are located. The place is litered with dummy silo like what the americans and russians have done so that the americans have to try hit every one to make sure they kill all the missiles.

If one of those missile parts can be carried around in a trailer than a underground truck system would not be a problem

Here was a picture of PLA procedures
[img=http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/4822/sss0bb.jpg]Link[/url]

We have two bridges of missiles assigned to different mountain regions while one other bridge does n ot yet have a exact location





[edit on 22-6-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 01:10 AM
link   
I did some research on the web about china's tunnel system for its ICBMs.
I found that there was a major project called the "Great Wall Tunnel" underneath Taihang Mountain range

here is a mape of what some international intelligence agenecy came up with the rough location and size for china's Taihang Mountain Tunnels:
www.war-sky.com...
the exact location/size/#of entrance/#of nukes are unknown, and will probably never be told, just like the US's area 51, but the purpose of the tunnel system is clear: for nuke storage/transportation and nuclear strike

And I also found a list and information about china's nuclears missile; those info has leaked out after some taiwanese spy incidents.
The info listed is about 4-6 years old , they are not 100% accurate(in fact, may not be accurate at all), written in chinese.
bbs.mydrivers.com...
I remember the spy incident was quite shocking when it first came out a few years ago; two PLA generals were charged with treason with out a public trial, and were executed.



Now I think this thread is totally off topic, it's supposed to be china take russia with 200M men, not what kinds of nukes does china have.

[edit on 22-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Wrong. Liquid rocket fuel is highly corrosive, so liquid-fuelled rockets in actual fact have a shorter life span and require more maintenance.


Never claimed otherwise.

I said that the liquid fueled rockets would last longer because they have no fuel inside. You thought bit about training for the techqies wouldn't apply if we assume the russians/soviets do/did the same for the rest of its armed forces. You must have heard about their neavy and airforce training. I few goes until you know what to do then leave you with that experience

Thats why the russian navy barely had any live firings.

Also about your point about solid missiles having a longer life span. The some(70) SS-25 which is a solid fueled rocket was decommed because they already reached their life expectancy before the SS-19 liquid fueled missile which entered service some years before the SS-25 which was the reason why I came to the conclusion that the russians dont keep their missiles on standby and instead fuel on launch


Also wrong. You don't need to collapse the entire tunnel network, just the entrance.


Why would there be one entrance or even a couple of them?. The chinese military had spent 10 years with tens of thousands of workers bulding the tunel complex. I dont even think you can move tens of thousands out of a silo type entrance in a couple of hours let alone the heavy machinery. Like most tunnel networks there is always more than one entrance


Besides which, a nuke going off outside the tunnel entrance and penetrating the tunnel entrance will cook everything inside the tunnel.


Thats what they said about smoking the viet cog out of their tunnels. Why do you assume that things like that aren't factored in

You are talking about a mountain range with a whole bunch of valleys and deep decents. Put a lanuch pad or silo in one of those valleys and you have protection from near nuke blast because its deep inside

Here is a extract of the article i posted

Like other known mountain ranges housing underground tunnel networks for China's strategic missiles, the Tai-Hei Mountain Range has many steep cliffs and canyons with large big elevation changes over a short distance between 1,000 and 2,000 meters


One other base like this one is the one the taiwanese have for their F-16s. The run way goes right into the mountain.

[edit on 22-6-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 02:01 AM
link   
I think you guys are forgetting that Russia and China are pretty much military allies now (I think more so behind the scenes.)

The Russia/China alliance is quite a force, even when compared to the US (although I am not saying they could take America.....but who knows.)



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 04:11 AM
link   
The focus here is on military might, when it should be on Economic might.

The US is slowly draining its ability to create reserves, let alone further credit on world markets.

Russia is creating massive fortunes as the largest oil exporter in the world, China is creating a Massive economic engine as the worlds center of manufacturing.

The US is spiraling downward as russia, china , india, africa, central and south america and asia as a whole continue to build their economies, mainly through peacefull cooperation.

China isnt going to invade Russia, they trade billions of dollars each day. they will continue to build each other up at the expense of the US, and its idiotic Foreign policies.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Toolman, you haven't a clue as to what you are talking about; the Chinese are not doing anything at the "expense" of the U.S., we are their biggest market and both nations are economically interlinked. If anybody is going to become allies, it is the United States and China, because our economies are too intertwined and big businesses have a LOT of influence on Capitol Hill, and the new rich Chinese business folk I am sure have some strong influence in Beijing (and if they don't, they're trying to gain it).

When that U.S. Navy aircraft landed in China against permission, what happened? Business lobbyists immediately rushed to Capitol hill to make sure that no crap was started between the U.S. and China to preserve business interests.

A war between China and the U.S. would entail China no longer selling the U.S. its products or the U.S. no longer buying Chinese products (probably both). This would do lots. For one, the Chinese economy goes down the tube. Two, the American lifestyle gets shot since so many Wal-mart products are made in China, and Americans love Wal-Mart.

The American and Chinese businesses would be having an uproar over this, and the American people would not like it. Americans like our cars, computers, videogames, paper plates, french fries, lamps, TVs, etc....whatever. AND, as the Chinese economy grows and their people gain a better lifestyle, they themselves wouldn't want to give up that lifestyle.

No full-on war would ever break out between China and the U.S. when the economies are linked the way they are, the American and Chinese people both would not want to support such a war and the businesses on both sides would not want to support such a war.

If any crap over Taiwan starts in the future, regardless of what happens, no war is gonna start.

And the U.S. is not spiraling downward, I don't know why you keep saying that without any actual evidence.



[edit on 22-6-2006 by WheelsRCool]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WheelsRCool
Toolman, you haven't a clue as to what you are talking about; the Chinese are not doing anything at the "expense" of the U.S., we are their biggest market and both nations are economically interlinked.


Which is exactly what they have done at your expense. You've shipped your manufacturing sector offshore and given it to them. They have built their success at your expense.


If anybody is going to become allies, it is the United States and China, because our economies are too intertwined


Correct, which is exactly what China wanted. Their goals are at direct odds with yours, they knew they couldn't match you militarily, so they've nobbled you economically.


and big businesses have a LOT of influence on Capitol Hill,


Yes, look at Halliburton. Which means that the owner's needs are addressed, not the people's needs.



and the new rich Chinese business folk I am sure have some strong influence in Beijing


I really doubt it.


When that U.S. Navy aircraft landed in China against permission, what happened? Business lobbyists immediately rushed to Capitol hill to make sure that no crap was started between the U.S. and China to preserve business interests.


Again youare describing exactly what is wrong with your system and exactly the flaw China knew it could exploit. Business interests decided their profits were more important than national soveriegnty, security or even international law. And China knew it. They are now doing what the Japanese did 30 years ago.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

and the new rich Chinese business folk I am sure have some strong influence in Beijing


I really doubt it.



Actually that is correct. eventhough china appear to be a capitalism country in terms of economics, there are still some fundamental differences.
most of the big chinese companies are either run by the government or backed up by the government.
ever wonders why the chinese government doesn't really collect tax from people and yet is so rich?
Is has another benefite, those companies will get all the supplies they need from the government in key competitions. Why do you think some "small" companies can easily buy IBM? Their government gave them all the money. They'll probably buy Microsoft too if Microsoft ever decides to sell itself.

But some thing must point out, for chinese government, there no business is more important than sovereignty.

[edit on 22-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by warset
ever wonders why the chinese government doesn't really collect tax from people and yet is so rich?
Is has another benefite, those companies will get all the supplies they need from the government in key competitions. Why do you think some "small" companies can easily buy IBM? Their government gave them all the money. They'll probably buy Microsoft too if Microsoft ever decides to sell itself.


LOL "don't tax peoples incomes ". China's top tax bracket is aout 46% - no tax pfft.
The largest Chinese companies are still ' small ' compared to the big US multinationals.



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1

Originally posted by warset
ever wonders why the chinese government doesn't really collect tax from people and yet is so rich?
Is has another benefite, those companies will get all the supplies they need from the government in key competitions. Why do you think some "small" companies can easily buy IBM? Their government gave them all the money. They'll probably buy Microsoft too if Microsoft ever decides to sell itself.


LOL "don't tax peoples incomes ". China's top tax bracket is aout 46% - no tax pfft.
The largest Chinese companies are still ' small ' compared to the big US multinationals.


no, u don't understand, the chinese tax system is so full of flaws that nearly no one pays taxes
the so called tax system seems almost volunteerly (although it's against the law to not pay tax, there is also no clear law about paying tax neither, and this tax thing is often used by the government as a "proof" to charge people who they don't like, and send them to jails for light punishment)
I know it sounds crazy to say this in a place like canada, but it's indeed true in china, and the chinese government has no intention in improving it's taxation system.

as for the small companies, that's exactly what i said, even though they are small, many can still easily buy the world's top multinationals if those plan to sell, because those chinese companies are either backed or run by the government. (eg. Lenovo IBM)

as i said, there are still fundamental differences between a communism-derived socialism society and a capitalism society.

[edit on 23-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by warset
the so called tax system seems almost volunteerly (although it's against the law to not pay tax, there is also no clear law about paying tax neither, and this tax thing is often used by the government as a "proof" to charge people who they don't like, and send them to jails for light punishment)


Well I mst work in a different China than you do, because I and the 13 000 other people who work in teh ompany here all pay tax.



as for the small companies, that's exactly what i said, even though they are small, many can still easily buy the world's top multinationals if those plan to sell, because those chinese companies are either backed or run by the government. (eg. Lenovo IBM)


Erm no, nnot even CHina possesses that sort of money, you are tlaking about trillions of dollars. Hell, have you seen the state of CHinese roads at the moment. Even China's largest companies re dwarved by western multinationals, China can't afford to buy tehm unless they want their economy to collapse.



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Well I mst work in a different China than you do, because I and the 13 000 other people who work in teh ompany here all pay tax.


You probaly do.

You must be working in a SEZ or another type of area where the chinese government has set up for foreign compaines. The are charged differently than the other areas of china. I'll give a personal example. In Xiamen(SEZ) where my uncle has some factories they get charged about a 20-30% in gross earnings. Personal income is about 35% for over $115,000 plus the cost of the lower income scheme. In putian which he has factorie/s(its a complex type thing) which supply the factories in Xiamen with semi-finished products get called for tax only a little bit.

Last year the chinese government added $283 billion to their economy after they did a search and calulate compaign to find the missing areas of the economy. Thats the problem with china, nothing out of the cities is regulated, corrupt officals can just take your land or sell them off in the name of the party and lie about what they did in their reports. Once the east to west program starts things are going to be more regulated


Hell, have you seen the state of CHinese roads at the moment.


They just built a 4 lane highway right though my town in china. I never heard of Hai Fong before so it must be a small village or something



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by rogue1
Well I mst work in a different China than you do, because I and the 13 000 other people who work in teh ompany here all pay tax.


You probaly do.

You must be working in a SEZ or another type of area where the chinese government has set up for foreign compaines. The are charged differently than the other areas of china. I'll give a personal example. In Xiamen(SEZ) where my uncle has some factories they get charged about a 20-30% in gross earnings. Personal income is about 35% for over $115,000 plus the cost of the lower income scheme. In putian which he has factorie/s(its a complex type thing) which supply the factories in Xiamen with semi-finished products get called for tax only a little bit.

Last year the chinese government added $283 billion to their economy after they did a search and calulate compaign to find the missing areas of the economy. Thats the problem with china, nothing out of the cities is regulated, corrupt officals can just take your land or sell them off in the name of the party and lie about what they did in their reports. Once the east to west program starts things are going to be more regulated


Hell, have you seen the state of CHinese roads at the moment.


They just built a 4 lane highway right though my town in china. I never heard of Hai Fong before so it must be a small village or something



totally agree with you

foreign compaines obviously have to pay everything

there is no such a place called "Hai Fong", the spelling "Fong" doesn't exist in Pinyin. It must be a taiwanese spelling or sumthin

[edit on 23-6-2006 by warset]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join