Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

U.S. vs. China

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
TPL

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

One thing Russia has always disliked about America is how the U.S. dominate EVERY discussion. It's almost like their opinion is the only one that matters, and Russia doesn't like that.


Every other country in the world also hates the U.S's domination in every discussion, treaty and meeting.




posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Well, right or wrong, that's what happens when one country controls roughly 20% of the worlds economy, has by far the most advanced military ect ect ect.
It happens because frankly, the US's opinion DOES matter more because the US has the most power.

Also, as far as China backing NK if the US got involved - DON'T COUNT ON IT.

Why would China go to war with a superior opponent that would emidiatly send China's economy into the tube by preventing any trade. Use your heads people - China wouldn't have ANYTHING to gain.



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 06:46 PM
link   
I agree with Mad Man on NK...NK is becomming a thorn in China's side because of this nuke issue. I mean, other than their ties with communism, why in the world would China side with NK over the US? The Cold War is over folks, communist ties only go so far these days...

Most likely, China wouldn't officially side with either, while unofficially pressuring NK to capitulate to the US, much like they have been trying to do for the past year and a half or so...



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   
exactly

NK doesn't have anything to offer China. The US on the other hand gives them billions every year in trade. It seems like a simple decision to me.



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I imagine that a US Military build up in that area for any reason is just about the last thing China wants right now. In any conflict over there, which a fight with NK would be, China has a lot more to lose than we do.

Actually I think China really wants to put a base on the moon. Then they could just drop rocks on whoever they wanted.


D

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Well, right or wrong, that's what happens when one country controls roughly 20% of the worlds economy, has by far the most advanced military ect ect ect.
It happens because frankly, the US's opinion DOES matter more because the US has the most power.

Also, as far as China backing NK if the US got involved - DON'T COUNT ON IT.

Why would China go to war with a superior opponent that would emidiatly send China's economy into the tube by preventing any trade. Use your heads people - China wouldn't have ANYTHING to gain.


They would lose a lot of trade, but I don't think it would affect China that drastically. Trade with the US has only recently been big and before that China was quite happy to deal with only Europe and Africa and they got on fine. So don't completely disregard China's strength, right now they're a sleeping giant economically and militarily.



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 05:37 AM
link   


Actually I think China really wants to put a base on the moon. Then they could just drop rocks on whoever they wanted.


No nation can put a base on the Moon. They are bound by the Moon Treaty. No nation or corperation can make claim to the moon.

As for dropping rockets on anyone they wanted: they don't need the moon to do that. Any nation with ICBMs can hit any target in the world.



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 08:30 AM
link   
The Moon Treaty? Like that will matter. For treaties to be effective, they have to be enforceable.

I hope China does go out and get busy in space. Somebody needs to and as much as I hate to admit it, the US is dropping the ball on space exploration. In this, I think China is looking ahead and realizing that we either need to get some people living off-planet in the next 50 years and start using some resources from out there, or we're all going to drown in our own biomass.

As far as Trade goes, I think parts of their economy probably are dependant on international trade to an extent. Lack of Trade would hurt but not crush them. As their culture and system changes and grows, they probably become more intertwined economically with the rest of us.

Like I've said, China and the US are going to grow more similar as they embrace capitalism more and we sadly become more socialist in our policies.



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 09:19 AM
link   
This is pretty far off base from the original topic: the six questions.

Anyway, if we did embargo China and stop all imports such as grain, raw materials, and products, it is very likely China would initiate a nuclear exchange once people started to starve. They would have nothing to lose by nuking the US. Of course, then we would nuke them but by that time the world world has gone straight to hell on an express train anyway. So the rest of this discussion is moot.



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 09:32 AM
link   
im a european so i am unbaised i have to say this how would china fight america they cant fight each on land because they etheir have to go through countries or over seas which is through a navy and costal defenses
i know they could fight in the aior and at sea but what would that acomplish?a blockade ? china could just use the other coutnries to get its reasources
so id say it would be a draw



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by NothingMakesSenseAnyway, if we did embargo China and stop all imports such as grain, raw materials, and products, it is very likely China would initiate a nuclear exchange once people started to starve.


China is not as reliant on food imports as some of you believe. They can provide for their population.
They even export more agricultural products than they import.

China is also a major exporter of corn. In 2002, China's agricultural exports totaled an estimated US$13 billion and its agricultural imports totaled US$10.8 billion.
www.ers.usda.gov...

They produce over 110 million tons of wheat and import about 2 million tons. I'm sure they could just increase their production if they are cut off.

The US only accounts for about 20% of China's total exports so even if a total trade sanction was placed on them, they could still survive.

This PDF shows what they import from the US:
www.mac.doc.gov...



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Well, right or wrong, that's what happens when one country controls roughly 20% of the worlds economy, has by far the most advanced military ect ect ect.
It happens because frankly, the US's opinion DOES matter more because the US has the most power.

Also, as far as China backing NK if the US got involved - DON'T COUNT ON IT.

Why would China go to war with a superior opponent that would emidiatly send China's economy into the tube by preventing any trade. Use your heads people - China wouldn't have ANYTHING to gain.


I'm not talking about whether opinions matter. I'm talking about respect for other nations (doesn't have to be military force). The U.S. has not done much of that since 1991. Worst, we have paid some heavy prices for that. Want proof? Read Rogue Nation. Great book, and the author is actually your kind of person. Patriotic, etc.

As far as China backing the U.S. DON'T COUNT ON IT.

Use your head American. China will probably stay out of the conflict, if it doesn't help NK. Like you say, they have nothing to gain if they help NK, but they've got little to gain from helping the U.S. U.S. will still dominate every discussion, and no amount of money will ever appease that for China.

But if China's interests are threatend by U.S., then it's time to rock-n-roll...



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TPL
Every other country in the world also hates the U.S's domination in every discussion, treaty and meeting.


That reminds me. One of the biggest problems about the U.N. in recent years has been the U.S. domination in the debates. For an organization that's supposed to offer a democratic way of nations to resolve problems humanely, it doesn't do that. Most of the reason is the way it's run. But it's also because the U.S. does everything to get it's way in the debates. Unfortunately, they succeed more often than not (except for Gulf War II). For something that the U.S. government heralds as an international democracy, it isn't able to do that, because the only thing democractic is how the U.S. succeeds every time.



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Back to the real topic at hand.

Something I've considered. Politics aside, let's say we do go to war with China. I think it'd be foolish for any of us to say America would suffer few casualties. Given that, it's pretty apparent the amount of military forces required would be immense, more than any way in American history, perhaps.

So, would that put a strain on our forces as a whole? Every U.S. military base in Asia, Pacific, and the West Coast of America would be emptied and sent to the theater. But if they take big losses, then they may need to call on forces committed to other theaters. Sure, we've got National Guard and Reserves, but they are more vulnerable because of their incompetance.

So, what do you think we would do if that happened? Would we really go all-out on them?



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 09:39 PM
link   
AceOfBase,

Glad you brought that up. As industrialized as China is, it has and still is a by-and-large agriculturally dominated nation.


D

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Back to the real topic at hand.

Something I've considered. Politics aside, let's say we do go to war with China. I think it'd be foolish for any of us to say America would suffer few casualties. Given that, it's pretty apparent the amount of military forces required would be immense, more than any way in American history, perhaps.

So, would that put a strain on our forces as a whole? Every U.S. military base in Asia, Pacific, and the West Coast of America would be emptied and sent to the theater. But if they take big losses, then they may need to call on forces committed to other theaters. Sure, we've got National Guard and Reserves, but they are more vulnerable because of their incompetance.

So, what do you think we would do if that happened? Would we really go all-out on them?


Its hard to say. As you said, the US military bases would be emptied and there is the big change of heavy casualties.



posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Well, right or wrong, that's what happens when one country controls roughly 20% of the worlds economy, has by far the most advanced military ect ect ect.
It happens because frankly, the US's opinion DOES matter more because the US has the most power.

Also, as far as China backing NK if the US got involved - DON'T COUNT ON IT.

Why would China go to war with a superior opponent that would emidiatly send China's economy into the tube by preventing any trade. Use your heads people - China wouldn't have ANYTHING to gain.


I'm not talking about whether opinions matter. I'm talking about respect for other nations (doesn't have to be military force). The U.S. has not done much of that since 1991. Worst, we have paid some heavy prices for that. Want proof? Read Rogue Nation. Great book, and the author is actually your kind of person. Patriotic, etc.

Simply because the US will not do what other countries want all the time does not mean that we don't respect other nations. I will check out that book - do you know the authors name?

As far as China backing the U.S. DON'T COUNT ON IT.

Use your head American. China will probably stay out of the conflict, if it doesn't help NK. Like you say, they have nothing to gain if they help NK, but they've got little to gain from helping the U.S. U.S. will still dominate every discussion, and no amount of money will ever appease that for China.

I said basically the same thing - my point was, IF they were to back one side or the other, it would be the US.

But if China's interests are threatend by U.S., then it's time to rock-n-roll...


It's Chinas funeral................



posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 11:02 AM
link   
How about.... America Vs. Oriental Spiderman


America could make alot of icecream sales out of that movie!


Soon america will have more enemies than true friends~ :p Especially if they think they can police the world! On what right?!??!!
GOD???? ^__^ haha~ It's funny! The USA's most potent weapon; is your stupidity.



posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Back to the real topic at hand.

Something I've considered. Politics aside, let's say we do go to war with China. I think it'd be foolish for any of us to say America would suffer few casualties. Given that, it's pretty apparent the amount of military forces required would be immense, more than any way in American history, perhaps.

So, would that put a strain on our forces as a whole? Every U.S. military base in Asia, Pacific, and the West Coast of America would be emptied and sent to the theater. But if they take big losses, then they may need to call on forces committed to other theaters. Sure, we've got National Guard and Reserves, but they are more vulnerable because of their incompetance.

So, what do you think we would do if that happened? Would we really go all-out on them?


You are very correct - the US could not INVADE right now. The war would most likely be several months to half a year of bombing before the first GI set foot in China. Like I said before, B-2s, F-117s to start along with cruise missles and naval bombardment. Then, once the air deffences are down B-1's B-52's come in to do strategic and saturation bombing. Also, like I said before, unlike in Iraq, it would be all out war - there would be little, if any, concern for civilian life. This wouldn't be a rebuilding project - we would be going in there to completely destroy and demoralize every human in that country - be it man woman or child. I'd say they might even have a few hundred million people die during these months.
I am talking no holding back - MOABs over every densly populated area. Precision strikes on vital areas. It would simply be the greatest period of attack mankind has ever known.

As for the strain - a draft would be initiated day 1. We would have almost all of our existing forces in the area during the bombing period, while a few million man army was assembled back home. I'm not sure on the numbers, but I would imagine that the US military could probably get at least 5 or 6 million men from the ages of 18-26. Add that to the million plus already in the military, and we are in buisness.

Honestly though, I don't even know if we would even step foot in there. I could see the US simply bombing them for years and simply waiting for China to surrender.

Again though, this is on the assumption that there were some kind of "no nukes allowed" rule agreed by both sides. Frankly, nukes would be Chinas only optin, IMHO.



posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
I said basically the same thing - my point was, IF they were to back one side or the other, it would be the US.


Not really. I said CHina has nothing to gain if it helps the U.S.

Why would China help a nation that it would have to bow to? Sure, China will get money and will probably have an ally. But China is not a weak nation. It has it's own sense of identity and destiny (different from those of America). Therefore, it's almost insane to even guess they would help the U.S. It has nothing to gain (besides money and a military ally), and even that's not worth it. It'll derail China's goals.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join



atslive.com

hi-def

low-def