Wake Up America: China is our Enemy!

I've been saying for years - against a wall of voices speaking to the contrary - that the biggest enemy we face in the future is Communist China. Make no mistake, they are gearing up for the day they see us as weak enough to strike. I found this on the thread concerning concentration camps. Please read this to get an idea of what I'm saying. Within the body of it Rep. Duncan Hunter sez "China has issued several aggressive statements, including one by the Chinese Defense minister that war with the United States is inevitable." If we don't pull our heads out of our a##s soon, we will pay a most severe price!


Here it is:
May 22, 2000

Learn From History: Don't Pass PNTR for China

By Rep. Duncan Hunter

It is often said that those who don't learn from history are
destined to repeat it. Congress should refuse to honor the
Clinton administration's pledge of permanent normalized trade
relations for China or risk repeating the deadly mistakes that
helped lead to World War II.

Lessons From World War II

Imperial Japan declared war on China in 1937. Regargless of this
aggressive behavior, the United States was the single largest
exporter of oil, iron ore (including scrap metal) and bauxite to
Japan, despite reports that those materials were being used to
build and modernize Japan's military.

In July 1941, finally recognizing the potential threat of Japan as
an aggressor, the United States froze Japan's assets and
embargoed oil shipments. Unfortunately, the damage was done.
Throughout the Pacific theater, our soldiers lost their lives at
the hand of a military built with American steel and aided by
American natural resources.

Meanwhile, Europe was following a policy of appeasement in
their relations with Germany. They believed that liberalized trade
would stimulate the German economy; Adolf Hitler would feel
secure; Germany would shift from armaments manufacturing to
consumer goods for export; and ultimately, Nazi Germany would
become a "normal" country.

The United States followed Europe's example and Americans
became the largest foreign holders of German government bonds
during the 1930s. U.S. capital helped build the Nazi war machine
that would take the lives of so many American soldiers.

Lessons From the Cold War

President Ronald Reagan's model for winning the Cold War
without military action was derived from lessons learned during
World War II. Reagan imposed unilateral sanctions and opposed
the West supplying dual-use equipment to the Soviet Union.

Reagan's more realistic trade policy helped bring an end to the
Soviet threat. It is this model that we should follow when
building a trading relationship with an aggressive foreign power,
not the failed policies that lead to World War II.

Today's Threat

China has begun an aggressive modernization plan for its
military, funded in part by a $592 billion trade surplus earned in
the 1990s alone. China's 2000 defense budget is a 13 percent
increase over 1999 expenditures, a trend of growing defense
funding that has spanned nearly a decade.

Meanwhile, U.S. defense spending has decreased dramatically.
In addition, People's Liberation Army companies not only earn
hard currency for military modernization programs through their
interaction with U.S. companies, they also play a crucial role in
espionage and proliferation activities on behalf of the Communist
Chinese government.

China, flush with U.S. dollars from a combination of Western
direct investment and huge trade surpluses, has partnered with
the cash-strapped Russians to purchase modern air superiority
fighters and long-range attack aircraft. The Chinese have also
acquired two Sovremenny-class destroyers armed with SS-N-22
"Sunburn" anti-ship missiles - a weapon designed specifically to
attack U.S. aircraft carrier groups.

In contrast, China is also developing new weapons of mass
destruction, including new land-mobile intercontinental ballistic
missiles armed with multiple-independently targetable warheads,
technology it acquired through illegal means from the United
States. China is also selling a wide variety of ballistic
missile-related goods and technology to rogue countries,
including Iran, Pakistan and Libya.

All agree that trade with China is making it strong. The U.S.
business community, often held hostage by the Communist
Chinese government to move technology and manufacturing
facilities to China in order to gain market access, is using its
significant influence to push through this legislation. Its mistake
is believing that a strong China is a friendly China.

Business lobbyists often claim that if the United States fails to
provide China with PNTR, U.S. businesses will loose access to
the Chinese market. However, the business community is more
attracted to China as a low-cost manufacturing base with
cheap labor and a lax regulatory regime than a market for U.S.
exports.

While China sends 39 percent of all its global exports to the
United States; we send only 1.9 percent of our global exports
to China. The idea that China will forfeit our consumer-rich U.S.
market in retaliation to a "no" vote on PNTR is extremely
unlikely.

Proponents of PNTR argue that a strategy of appeasement will
bring China into the global economy where it will act more
responsibly, switch production efforts away from military
modernization and focus on consumer goods. This is precisely
the theory employed by most of pre-World War II Europe in its
relations with Nazi Germany.

If we continue funding the Chinese military buildup through
trade and direct investment it will be to our detriment, and we
will pay with the lives of our men and women in uniform across
the globe.

Despite claims that China is ready to take its place in the world
economy, the facts cannot be denied. Over the last year, China
has issued several aggressive statements, including one by the
Chinese Defense minister that war with the United States is
"inevitable."

These blatant threats, in combination with China's aggressive
arming of trigger-happy third world countries, demonstrate that
Communist China is not our "strategic partner."

Congress must not abandon our primary constitutional function:
to provide for our national defense. Some people deride those
who oppose PNTR as "protectionists." We should cheerfully
accept that label. After all, the young men and women of the
U.S. armed forces are certainly worth protecting, and it is they
who will bear the brunt of a heavily armed China.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) is chairman of the Armed
Services subcommittee on military procurement.
=============================================================================

*15,15*
Tell me East, do you truly believe China is a threat?
I'll give you my response after you give me yours...

- Tass *40 for a short post *

Yeah have to agree with you on this.

I think that China is becoming the new USSR but with a capitalistic economy.

Is it me or are the controllers experimenting with political and economic systems to create the perfect system for takeover and eventual enslavement of all people?

T-
Yep, I absolutely do, for various reasons. I've thought this for many years.

*15,15*
I've had this saved up for members who think China is a greater threat to the US then the US is to itself...

The U.S. would own the Chinese if it ever came to full-scale conventional war. While there may be a lot more Chinese than Americans, apparently none of you who site this fact have any understanding of military logistics. For every soldier in the field, there are ten people at home in the fields providing the food for that soldier, in the factories building the weapons that he fights with or fabricating the clothes that he wears, in the MASH units ready to sew him up if he gets hurt, etc. As you can imagine, this tends to cause the added "attritional bonus" offered by China's superior numbers to dwindle and evaporate quite quickly. Furthermore, the U.S., by virtue of it's superior farming and manufacturing ability, can actually mobilize a much greater proportion of it's population than can the Chinese without impacting productivity in the slightest, so you might actually find numerical superiority to be on the side of the Americans if it ever came to mass conscription...

Then you have to factor America's immense technology advantage. The Chinese field a small and antiquated air force composed primarily of older model MiG's, which historically have been smashed to pieces when going up against American F-15, F/A-18, F-14, and F-16 aircraft, even when they have the numerical advantage (which in this case is unlikely).

On the ground, the T-72 is completely inadequate to the task of stopping the M1A2 Abrams. With the chobham armoring on the Abrams, the only way to penetrate is to get directly behind and fire a round right into the grille on their six. In all engagements to date, no tank force has ever been able to disable an Abrams, and the only time they've been disabled at all was when facing ambushes from infantry wielding RPG's. Meanwhile the 120mm on the M1 can kill a T-72 in a single shot. In one instance during the first Gulf War, a single shot had so much penetration power it actually went clean through one Iraqi T-72 and then disabled another directly behind it.

As for infantry, the Kalashnikov is okay, but not especially accurate. It's often said that the only people who buy a Kalashnikov are those who can't afford an M-16, standard issue for Americans.

Another reason is simple training and tactical superiority. Americans are far better trained on average than the regulars of any other nation, and their tactics are better to boot. Should the Chinese ever wind up in combat with us, they would quickly find their C3 complexes gutted with precision airstrikes, which is especially devastating when you consider how centrally-controlled Chinese military doctrine is. Without command, the Chinese cannot function. In the meantime, every time a group manages to mass, they would quickly find themselves to unrelenting saturation bombardments. A few daisy-cutters would either force them to scatter into units too small to form any cohesive defense, or be shredded.

Plus, there is the fact the United States army is all voluntary.
Chinese are conscripts.
They don't want to invade a country they can't conquer...

To sum it all up for those who don't wanna read, We'd own China' @$$ in war!!!

Cheers,
- Tass *40*

Originally posted by THENEO
Yeah have to agree with you on this.

I think that China is becoming the new USSR but with a capitalistic economy.

Is it me or are the controllers experimenting with political and economic systems to create the perfect system for takeover and eventual enslavement of all people?

Exactly! Something to that effect theneo. Read the thread concerning concentration camps also.

Notice our troops are all being sent out of country. This is a dangerous thing. We are hopelessly bogged down in Iraq, Afghanistan, Columbia and everywhere else. Our economy cannot bear the tax cuts and excessive military spending. If the OPEC goes Euro, for example, our economy will collapse. How would we be able to defend our nation against a Chinese onslaught?
That's not even mentioning the ghastly size of their military. Can you say human body waves?

[Edited on 19-09-2003 by EastCoastKid]

while america is sinking into neverending wars, china is emerging as the new superpower

*15,15*
Alright East, let's go with your theory...

Let's say every American soldier is killed....
Alright the reserves and National Gaurd are summoned....
In the event they are killed, state militias and state gaurds are summoned...
IN THE EVENT THEY ARE KILLED....
Our nukes have already torched the rest of the planet.
Let's say everyone in the government died *NEO has a twinkle in his eye right now*....
They still would not be able to invade the US.
You don't go into the streets of LA without at least a full batallion of fully armed soldiers.
Hell, our gangsters in LA alone could take out the whole Chines army.
Not to mention Houston, New York, and Chicago gangs....
Then of course my native brethren would jack them up too...

Now you must also take into account how heavily armed American civilians are.
There are an average of 4.3 guns per household.
Plus our Vietnam vets wouldn't let anyone get close to their houses....

Had enough yet?
- Tass *40*

Originally posted by Tassadar
*15,15*

Furthermore, the U.S., by virtue of it's superior farming and manufacturing ability, can actually mobilize a much greater proportion of it's population than can the Chinese without impacting productivity in the slightest, so you might actually find numerical superiority to be on the side of the Americans if it ever came to mass conscription...

Then you have to factor America's immense technology advantage. The Chinese field a small and antiquated air force composed primarily of older model MiG's, which historically have been smashed to pieces when going up against American F-15, F/A-18, F-14, and F-16 aircraft, even when they have the numerical advantage (which in this case is unlikely).

On the ground, the T-72 is completely inadequate to the task of stopping the M1A2 Abrams. With the chobham armoring on the Abrams, the only way to penetrate is to get directly behind and fire a round right into the grille on their six. In all engagements to date, no tank force has ever been able to disable an Abrams, and the only time they've been disabled at all was when facing ambushes from infantry wielding RPG's. Meanwhile the 120mm on the M1 can kill a T-72 in a single shot. In one instance during the first Gulf War, a single shot had so much penetration power it actually went clean through one Iraqi T-72 and then disabled another directly behind it.

As for infantry, the Kalashnikov is okay, but not especially accurate. It's often said that the only people who buy a Kalashnikov are those who can't afford an M-16, standard issue for Americans.

Another reason is simple training and tactical superiority. Americans are far better trained on average than the regulars of any other nation, and their tactics are better to boot. Should the Chinese ever wind up in combat with us, they would quickly find their C3 complexes gutted with precision airstrikes, which is especially devastating when you consider how centrally-controlled Chinese military doctrine is. Without command, the Chinese cannot function. In the meantime, every time a group manages to mass, they would quickly find themselves to unrelenting saturation bombardments. A few daisy-cutters would either force them to scatter into units too small to form any cohesive defense, or be shredded.

Plus, there is the fact the United States army is all voluntary.
Chinese are conscripts.
They don't want to invade a country they can't conquer...

To sum it all up for those who don't wanna read, We'd own China' @$$ in war!!!

Cheers,
- Tass *40*

Tass,
this is a very thoughtful critiqe; however it advocates the cold war strategic view on all levels. For example, thanks to "free trade" our manufacturing base isn't nearly what it was at the time of the Gulf War - even. As for farming, the corporations have taken over the industry running the independent farmers out of business. We are not nearly as self-sufficient as we were even in the 80's.
Other factors must be considered, also. If OPEC went Euro and our economy collapsed, which it most certainly would, we would not have the ability to produce and/or pay for the oil which drives our awesome and superior tanks and vehicles. Many many factors are at play. Those are just a few.
One reminder: Study the history of China. We must not make the fatal mistake they made so long ago in thinking they were superior. They called themselves the Middle Kingdom b/c they thought they were at the center of it all. They paid a most severe price in the end.

Conquering and invading America is one thing. Occupying the country would be damn nigh impossible for anyone really.

When you take the overwhelming geographic diversity, weather disatsers, ect, The US makes a very poor choice in occupation zones.

However, this does not eliminate Chinas threat. China is still a major threat, one we need to pay close attention to.

Our constant trading and shipping manufacturing there is weakening us. We are spread TOO thin in bull# wars everywhere. And China isnt limited to just Migs anymore, they are devloping newer and heavier technology, thanks to us .

*15,15*
China was conquered by the Mongols.
I see no "uncharted lands" in the steppes with warriors arising bent on holy vengeance.
Unless, of course, you wish to take the NWO into account...

I do not see China attacking us.
Not only becuase of our obvious military superiority,
Also, they would loose well over half of their export buyers for the child labor clothing.
The United States will not be going to war with any world powers, we are too closely tied to every country.
Yes, even Russia, war is impossible...

- Tass *40*

China will not invade CONUS militarily. They will infilitrate in many other ways. We will fight them in the Middle East.

*15,15*
China, Japan, Syria and the US...
The four world powers to be.

- Tass *40*

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
And China isnt limited to just Migs anymore, they are devloping newer and heavier technology, thanks to us

.

BINGO. Once again, Skadi is right on target. Skadi, would you enlighten us on Clinton's traitorous behaviour concerning China?

To back Tass up in his well put statements, China has many times over said it would be suicide to attack america on it's own turf, due ONLY to the number of American Citizens with guns. They "claim" they don't fear our militaries size, but, when you are coming up against a 6+billion person army of citizens, it's sucide.

Oh yeah, and to back the 4.3 guns per household, I have 10, and I am working on 5 more. My advice to ANY invader, stay off my land B!7C#.

Truely, Russia is the one to worry about. Not now, but down the road. They really are the only TRUE threat to the US.

Why certainly, East Coast!

Our former traitor in command....er.....president, Bill the Draft dodger to chicken # to admit he inhaled hater of the United States of America, took away one key edge we had:

We had the neutron bomb, China didt. The Neutron bomb was one scary little toy we possesed that scared the hell out of the chinese. It was part of our nuclear magic hat.

In case, for those who dont know, the Neutron bomb is a nasty little pet: it basically, when its dropped, kills everything alive, in an area, and makes it unlivable for a month or so. But it doesnt harm infrastructire, it doesnt destroy buildings or roads or factories, it leaves those untouched. So, we could depopulate a region, and move in and take over whatever goodies they left behind for us.

China was nervous and rightfully so. That is, until Clinton.....who met with leaders during his preidential campaigns. He dismissed a few Chinese spys who got caught stealing nuke secrets from our arsenal. Suddenly, China now had Neutron bomb tech. Gee......wonder how?

Notice the thread under aircraft projects: China develops P-10. China is getting new and better technology thanks to us, our loyal patriotic comapnies who will sell anything to the highest bidder, and our Presidents, who only care about feathering thier nests and retaining power.

Russia and China will join forces against us. That final battle will be fought in the Middle East. Forget about what the media and academia has beaten into our psyches - Russia is still a major threat.

Thank you, Skadi.

Let me add this, the Red Chinese bought and paid for Klinton's re-election in '96. He is a traitor.

Originally posted by Tassadar
*15,15*
China, Japan, Syria and the US...
The four world powers to be.

- Tass *40*

more like china russia and india

Yes, definitely India. And Pakistan. Bush's pre-emptive war doctrine has loosed the hounds of hell and perpetual warfare on the world. It has unleashed a new and suicidal race for all would-be powers to persue weapons of mass destruction. Japan will be next to go Nuclear.