A World of Paper Tigers, like China!

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Chinawhite, i mus agree with DD3, protecting your shipping lines is a very legitimate worry for ANY country that is aspiring to be a major world power in the future (Note i did not use the word Superpower, because i think the term is outdated and defunct)

I know that India will have a couple of Carriers in service soon enough with another indigenous one to follow afterwards.

Could you elaborate what steps, if any, the Chinese are taking in this regard. There have been rumours in the past about China acquring a carrier of its own but never has anything been confirmed.

thanks




posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mel1962
Read the facts on globalsecurity.org,


Facts?, they might be facts but there old facts.


None of this information is from Beijing, they dont release ANY information and pictures because its not part of them "rising peacefully"



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by mel1962
Read the facts on globalsecurity.org,


Facts?, they might be facts but there old facts.


None of this information is from Beijing, they dont release ANY information and pictures because its not part of them "rising peacefully"


So you speak for Beijing? I suppose you think Janes doesn't know anything either? I find all your photo's and info very suspicious, perhaps your an operative or propoganda front for the Chinese Government?



[edit on 2/10/07 by mel1962]

[edit on 2/10/07 by mel1962]China waits patiently . . .

[edit on 2/10/07 by mel1962]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mel1962
So you speak for Beijing?


No..........

Do you speak for the Washington?




I find all your photo's and info very suspicious


What info, what photos?????


propoganda front for the Chinese Government?


How would I be a propaganda front for the Chinese government when im saying ALL the opposite things they have said



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by mel1962
So you speak for Beijing?


No..........

Do you speak for the Washington?

No I am a private citizen speaking his mind and you?





I find all your photo's and info very suspicious


What info, what photos?????

On your web site in your signature!



propoganda front for the Chinese Government?


How would I be a propaganda front for the Chinese government when im saying ALL the opposite things they have said
:

Exactly, why is it that your web site you post is hosted by a Commercial Export/Import Consultant Company based in the UK? I believe you are a front for the Chinese Government. While I appreciate your post, I believe you should not be identified as a member, but more appropriately as a Government Agent!


[edit on 2/10/07 by mel1962]

[edit on 2/10/07 by mel1962]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Here is a fine example of a conspiracy nut



Originally posted by mel1962
Exactly, why is it that your web site you post is hosted by a Commercial Export/Import Consultant Company based in the UK? I believe you are a front for the Chinese Government.


Because its like the other millions of websites hosted by indiviuals. Its connected with the other sino(Chinese) websites like sinodefence.com



I believe you should not be identified as a member, but more appropriately as a Government Agent


So us international communist members are looking for small town folk like yourself?



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Here is a fine example of a conspiracy nut



Originally posted by mel1962
Exactly, why is it that your web site you post is hosted by a Commercial Export/Import Consultant Company based in the UK? I believe you are a front for the Chinese Government.


Because its like the other millions of websites hosted by indiviuals. Its connected with the other sino(Chinese) websites like sinodefence.com



I believe you should not be identified as a member, but more appropriately as a Government Agent


So us international communist members are looking for small town folk like yourself?


Hmmm . . . I am a conspiracy nut?


Too bad you didn't answer my questions and then tried to change the subject by referring to another web site!

Hmmm . . . . I am a bit creeped out by this operation, you admit to being an international communist based in the UK posting to a web site promoting the chinese government? I think you made my point! Thanks!



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by mel1962
Hmmm . . . I am a conspiracy nut?


If you had a link to a American site, does that make you an American agent. If it doesn't, why does a site linking to about china located in the UK have to link back to the Chinese government.

You simply assumed the most extreme scenarios instead of thinking logically. Because I seem Chinese to you I'm automatically labeled a communist working for the Chinese government. The site under my name is then automatically also linked to the Chinese government.


Too bad you didn't answer my questions and then tried to change the subject by referring to another web site!


Because I dont have to explain anything to you, satisfied?



you admit to being an international communist based in the UK posting to a web site promoting the chinese government?



Sometimes people are so thick, let me makes things cleared with explanations before my sentences so you don't get confused since you obviously don't understand the concept of sarcasm


[SARCASM]

Oh yea Mel, I'm a international communist working for the communist government in the UK using this website as a front to recruit and organize evil communist activities against small town American folk like yourself

[/SARCASM]


Now back to reality,

1) Where did I admit I was "supposedly" based in the UK, you assumed because of the .UK

2) How is the site "promoting the Chinese government, you just assuming (wrongfully) that all sites about Chinese culture and china itself is somehow linked to the Chinese government

3) Where did I say i'm actually connected to that site in the first place

4) Now lastly, how the hell did you think you'll actually get someone to admit they are a spy. Seriously, do you think they'll just tell you if you simply popped the question to them. "oh yeah mate, i justed wanted to get this off my chest"



Funny enough in this last week or so, I had just been accused of not being chinese




.







[edit on 10-2-2007 by chinawhite]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Westpoint is indeed correct. Israel has some good equipment, good technology, good training, and everything else you need to be effective in combat. The problem that they're more of a defense force. They could hold off an attack by all their neighbors I'd bet, or even hold off a US invasion force for a bit with good performance. But you couldn't ask them to go invade the whole rest of the Middle East or the US, that's not what they're setup to do. And I can't say that it's such a bad thing to have a good defensive force.

But force projection is just something they don't have outside of their region. I realize that their special forces units proved that Israel has a long reach by rescuing hostages in Uganda I think it was, but they can't make massive force deployments like the US or USSR could've.

Same goes for China, and probably Russia and the EU to a lesser extent. China's force projection capabilities are pretty short range, while Russia's are questionable, and only a few of the EU's members have proper force projection abilities (mostly just the UK and France). Although I'm interested to see what kind of force projection the EU, India and China will be creating for themselves.

Oh and Semperfoo, that was a pretty interesting read. Thanks for that link.


the new Country that the EU will be helping the most will be Poland. their airforce will be one of the world's best by 2020.

en.wikipedia.org...

the Sukhoi Su-22 looks freaking sweet in the pics on the right side





as for China being a world super power, don't think so. NATO and EU will be strengthening each other left and right, the Asian and Middle Eastern countries will never stand a chance, unless Europe plunges itself into Nuclear war and bring America down with them, which i don't see happening any time soon.

[edit on 01/14/2007 by CrazyPolak]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 11:18 PM
link   
I think the EU is actually putting more effort into arming China then they are themselves, if only they were legally allowed to sell China weapons. Also, Russia...what's the deal with Russia? China will probably be a massive threat to Russian security in the future, so what do they do? They do everything they can to help China militarise, eg selling them weapons/tech.

EDIT: Yeah that Su-22 does look pretty cool (bit old though), I also like how the Su-47 looks www.airforce-technology.com...

[edit on 10-2-2007 by Cthulwho]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cthulwho
I think the EU is actually putting more effort into arming China then they are themselves, if only they were legally allowed to sell China weapons. Also, Russia...what's the deal with Russia? China will probably be a massive threat to Russian security in the future, so what do they do? They do everything they can to help China militarise, eg selling them weapons/tech.


absolutly not
EU, can't even sell weapon to china at the moment

beside even if EU in the future is allowed to sell weapons to china, those are probably going to be crappy weapons that no one want, including china.

china these year has been focusing on producing its own weapons. it stops buying weapons soon as china can make them on itself.
fewer and fewer weapons are being bought from russia these days(mostly jet engines) as china made their own counter parts to these things.

[edit on 2/11/2007 by warset]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by warset
NATO is not an opposition to the US, it's an organiztion led by the US!

i think you meant EU (european union)
[edit on 2/4/2007 by warset]

Actually its led by a man from amsterdam at the moment.....I think Mr Scheffer would be rather insulted you called him american. And the head of the military side is canadian btw.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]


Originally posted by warset

beside even if EU in the future is allowed to sell weapons to china, those are probably going to be crappy weapons that no one want, including china.

Still touchy after that sub fire eh warset? Well canada was smart enough to buy "crappy" weapons off the EU lol so obviosly they cant be that bad.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by warset
NATO is not an opposition to the US, it's an organiztion led by the US!

i think you meant EU (european union)
[edit on 2/4/2007 by warset]

Actually its led by a man from amsterdam at the moment.....I think Mr Scheffer would be rather insulted you called him american. And the head of the military side is canadian btw.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



i meant the idea and the actually power of NATO is led by the US
You dont seriously think that Netherland is in charge of these don't you?
Netherland in terms of power is a joke compared to the US



Originally posted by warset

beside even if EU in the future is allowed to sell weapons to china, those are probably going to be crappy weapons that no one want, including china.

Still touchy after that sub fire eh warset? Well canada was smart enough to buy "crappy" weapons off the EU lol so obviosly they cant be that bad.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



EU wouldn't be much help to china anyway,
even Russia nowadays tend sell their junks to china at an extremely expensive price;
they don't want china to get their hands on their top secret stuff, they just want to make money.

PS. the puny canadian force nowadays is like a joke without the US force helping them

[edit on 2/11/2007 by warset]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 09:15 PM
link   
What the hell is going on here??!!





posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by warset
i meant the idea and the actually power of NATO is led by the US

Oh the "actual" power, I take it you like troop numbers and political influence?



You dont seriously think that Netherland is in charge of these don't you?
Netherland in terms of power is a joke compared to the US

Well a general from the netherlands is in charge so I would say yes , yes they are. Power in NATO does not equal command, it does equal influence but does not equal power.



EU wouldn't be much help to china anyway,
even Russia nowadays tend sell their junks to china at an extremely expensive price;

You mean like SU's or the migs they sell them?
Or maybe the guided missile frigates they selt them? Yes very backdated.
How about isreal? I do believe they have sold plenty of americas top of the range stuff to china have they not?



PS. the puny canadian force nowadays is like a joke without the US force helping them
[edit on 2/11/2007 by warset]

Joke as in it cant take away another countries ability to defend itself or that it cant defend itself against its most dangerous enemy: Mexico or cuba?
Seriosly, canada has no worries about defence, if anyone attacks canada they must first pass VERY close to US airspace or fly right over it. Hence thier small fleet, I take it your born in canada but support the US then?



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by warset
i meant the idea and the actually power of NATO is led by the US
You dont seriously think that Netherland is in charge of these don't you?
Netherland in terms of power is a joke compared to the US


Ummmm......you do realize that NATO picks its leaders(i.e. Chiefs of Staff) based on competence of command by SACEUR(Supreme Allied Commander Europe). Its not about being from the most powerful country in the alliance, its about being good in the art of command and are generally educated as such. There have only ever been 2 US NATO Chiefs of staff, Generals Omar Bradley and Lyman Lemnitzer. Hasnt been an American Chief of Staff since 1963 and all SACEUR's have been American, that should tell you something, that the selection of the chiefs is done fairley based on merit. I'm sure politics get involved, but you dont let them choose military leaders for you, youd end up with idiots such as Custard.

But the Current SACEUR is an American and not Dutch Devilwasp. The Deputy commander is English.

History of NATO Supreme Allied Commanders Europe

[edit on 2/15/2007 by ludaChris]

[edit on 2/15/2007 by ludaChris]

mod edit: to fix quote tag code

[edit on 22-2-2007 by UK Wizard]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by warset
PS. the puny canadian force nowadays is like a joke without the US force helping them


You want to see Canadians in battle? I link you a couple of vids, so you can see theyre very competent troopers. Youll see them ourflank an maneuver Taliban forces who have ambushed them. Of course the US would back them heavily, as any conflict on Canadian soil is on our doorstep, not to mention theyre good friends and neighbors to have
A beautiful country worth defending if it came to it.

P.S. Youll find a lot of videos here showing other NATO forces in training and Combat, they all look just as mean as Americans or Brits or any other trained armed forces, I wouldnt want to face them.

Canadian Forces Ambush-Warning Mild Language

Canadian Forces- Dawn Raid- Mild Language

Canadian Forces- Firefight in Afghanistan- Mild Language



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 01:44 PM
link   
As a Chinese citizen, just a few clarifications:

1. Chinese domestic political discontent is far less severe than most westerners prefer to imagine. You might be able to see occasional rural clashes with the police, but they take such a small portion of the population, and they are basically neglectible in China. The majority of the Chinese people gain a lot from the discipline and stability, and any radical political and economic changes are intolerably risky.

2. Chinese political system is a partisan dictatorship. The government is organized in a flexible hierarchy. Every people have chances to climb up the political hierarchy. However, of course, given the population, the competition is very intense.

3. The Chinese political leaders are mostly majoring in Hard Science and Engineering in the college. So the Chinese politics are like engineering management in a national scale.

4. About India and China, the advantage that India has over China is that both Russia and America are not worried about India's power, so India can buy lots of weapons from them. From CIA Factbook, India's 60 years of capitalism and western democracy are far less effective than China's 30 years of communism, 30 years of capitalism and 60 years of dictatorship. But I agree that British colonists have also given India some essence of the western spirit. China should learn from India's innovative spirits and enterpreneurship.

5. About Chinese weapons and Chinese military, Chinese military growth mainly happens after 1996 when Taiwan political groups begin to push for independence. Chinese military strength is far less than American strength. China cannot compete with America globally. However, near Chinese borders, America is likely to pay very high prices if America wants to get involved in the Far East for the third time after Korea and Vietnam.

6. About securing Chinese oil supplies, it is a problem, but China has many land pipes from Russia, Kazachstan, and likely soon Pakistan and Iran. Ocean oil shippings are comparatively less important to China as it will do to America or Japan.

7. Basically speaking, Chinese people are very inward looking people. If it is not necessary, Chinese are not interested in having anything to do with other countries, and are not so eager to be the global cop as American is. Another interesting issue is that why China has to make more people fluent in English?? Foreigners should learn Chinese.

[edit on 22-2-2007 by Luketao]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Though I disagree with some of your post..overall good points.. Welcome to the boards lukato.


edit: haha messed your name up. Luketao

[edit on 022828p://1502pm by semperfoo]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 03:43 PM
link   
China a paper tiger? maybe only in the delluded dream like minds of some. China in the next twenty years will be on a par with America, its growth rate at the moment is around 10% and whilst China is making money American is on the verge of bankrupcy, 9 trillion dollars and counting.

If certain members here want to fool themselves into thinking China is not a threat military planners in the US would disagree with them, they are not just concerned about China's military build up but also its increasing influence around the world especially South America.

With regard to the military prowess of Israel some seem to have forgoten that it could not even protect itself against the Scud missiles fired from Iraq and relied on the US for help, its a tiny country with a tiny population and as most wars are wars of attrition they would not last long.

Whilst many here would like to convince themselves that the US is all powerful one should never underestimate one's enemy only a fool would do so. And again as stated before most wars are wars of attrition, in a war between the US and China, China would win simply by the fact that it can replace the cannon fodder which the US cannot.

Thats the reason why most wars are won, it is the ability to sustain heavy losses over along period of time, think of the the American Civil war, the South had the better fighters but could not match the numerical superiority of the North or its industrial capacity, In ww2 the Russians were inferior to the Germans (initially) but they could sustain massive losses which the Germans could not.

America's technological adavantage could be its achilles heal, the tecno in modern weapons today means that weapons systems and platforms cannot be easily replaced, modern aicraft carriers are not liberty ships and once lost are not easily replaced. The reliance on such techno systems could be a fatal flaw.

Ideology plays an important part in winning wars, the Chinese Military planners see Americans as inferior especially with regard to above, they see Americans as mentally weak and not capable of susutaining heavy casulties.

But probally the most important factor is that the Chinese are far more subtle than the Americans, whilst they are stomping over the world in their oversized jack boots the Chinese are slowly infiltrating the system, America does not have to be beaten Militarily, that can be achieved by the Chinese buying the US out of the trade system. One which they have in full swing at the moment, a ploy which I may add that is being actively supported by most Americans.





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join