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.

 

Is China preparing to conquer the United States?

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by mike_trivisonno
 


Gee, you really should have been around in the 50's!
You and McCarthy, ( Joe, not Charlie), would have been great together.
Your friend Bush is the one that hugely increase our debt to China to finance his wars. I guess the Chinese hate us for our freedoms huh?




posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


Recently, we were told in the news that China was trying to buy as much land for cultivation in Canada... The taking over has started.

Stupid Chinese also served the American on their bending knees, no? Unless all the Chinese who died while building railroads were not then considered to be full humans...



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by tauempire

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Like it was said earlier. The chinese have taken over the majority of North America's largest cities. If they were sleeping cells and came the time to awake it will not go well for the u.s.

Not to mention that the Chinese have a 200 million man army. Yes, most in reserves but still that one armed man for almost every walking american citizen.

When China invades it will be with Russia with help of the Middle east Coalition.


You know NOTHING of warfare. There is no way they can even GET HERE with that many men. they have only ONE aircraft carrier. They have almost ZERO power projection.


Who needs aircraft carriers when there are technologies that have made that relic of warfare redundant?



It would be a logistical NIGHTMARE to arm and feed 200 million soldiers.


An occupation force at least and almost unlimited reserves.





China cant do jack squat to the united states.



[edit on 25-5-2010 by tauempire]



The U.S have yet to engage in battle with a real trained military force such as the Russians and Chinese in modern times.

If war were to happen between these super powers, you would here of devastating losses to the U.S in short time. I will put my money on it.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
If the US were to attempt a war with China, it would face a much worse time than it did in Vietnam or Kosovo. A US bombing strike on the Chinese mainland would not only be struck down by the Chinese air defences (SAMs, AAMs, etc.) but also face a full fledged counter attack from China’s PLAAF. The small size of Taiwan would make the US bases there a vulnerable target for Chinese missile attacks, while the huge territorial depth of China would secure itself from an overwhelming counterattack. The PLA and the Chinese people would be unlike any adversary the US faced in the past. Like Kosovo, there would be a lot of surprises in store for US forces but unlike Kosovo they wouldn’t be facing 10,000 disorganised troops. Instead it would be a 2.5 million strong army with full fledged air, ground, sea and missile forces; all backed by a relatively stable economy and effectively dispersed human intelligence (HUMINT).


A war with China would also result in severe economic repercussions for the US due to a major chunk of its economic activities on China and if such a war prolonged, it would throw the American economy into chaos. China’s economy would also be hurt, but the Chinese will be able to carry on much better than Americans, owing to their history of surviving through severly devastating wars in the near past.

A nuclear option would carry an even more severe repurcussion for both sides. In the case of a nuclear first strike by the US, China’s retaliation would obliterate 20-40 of the largest US cities, effectively wiping off 40-100 million people in the American mainland. Even if the US uses its large arsenal to secure a victory, the after-effects of a nuclear exchange will render the American mainland into massive wasteland. There will be no actual victors, only a massive loss of human lives and property.

www.abytheliberal.com...



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Spot on. The future of warfare isn't F-22's it's swarming tactics. The US is still built on the idea of the grand event where the war is decided in a single or a series of major battles. Future wars will be like Vietnam, where defensive positions would be attacked from multiple sides at the same time in very quick succession.

Also the US can't occupy China, to think so is absurd. A country of 1.6 billion cannot be conquered by a country of just over 300 million. It isn't just a question of military man power, but where would these troops base from? All of the major ports on the Chinese coast are heavily populated. The western provinces are either mountainous or have some of the harshest deserts in the world. To the south you have a few allies, but you also have allies for the Chinese. The last one you could base from may be India, but the only access points between the two nations could easily bottleneck forces, making it difficult to push into the country.

Naval and Air power can only get you so far. And sure the Chinese have older tech overall, but they are modernizing at a faster rate than the US is building up. Also, strategically they are allied with Russia, so if the war drums did start beating you might see the transfer of some of the new Pak Fa (Russia's F-22) once they start producing in a few years.

That being said there is an easy way to defeat China without laying a single foot on their land and that is by denying them access to oil. Close the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca and you just cut off 85% of their energy supply. You could have convoys of oil tankers still shipping to allies or neutral countries this way as well. China right now is building pipelines to try and get around this, but for right now that amount of oil still has to ship through those two straits. We have a knife to their throat just as much as they have one to ours.

[edit on 5/25/2010 by Sir Solomon]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   
This involves some new takes on the matter which I have not considered before, involving Nicaragua and Panama.

www.tldm.org...


Bill Gertz, in his latest book, The China Threat, exposes the grave national security risks that have accompanied the turnover of the Panama Canal. Former President Clinton, when asked about Chinese involvement in the Panama Canal, responded, "I think the Chinese will, in fact, be bending over backwards to make sure they run [the Panama Canal] in a competent and able and fair manner... I would be very surprised if any adverse consequences flowed from the Chinese running the canal." In effect, an admission of Chinese involvement in the Canal. Clinton later made a "clarification" as he had said too much, and had alarmed many Americans. The company in question, Lampoa-Hutchinson, is run by Hong Kong billionaire Li Kashing, known to have strong ties with the People's Liberation Army. This company now owns the entrance and exit ports to the Canal.

U.S. Representative Dana Rohrabacher has stated, "Li Kashing and his Hong Kong-based company [Lampoa-Hutchinson] and subsidiaries are closely associated with the Beijing regime and have a history of acting as sources of funding or acting as intermediaries in deals for the People's Liberation Army."

In a August 1, 1999 letter to former Defense Secretary William Cohen, Senator Trent Lott stated that the Chinese shipping company had gained great control over the Canal and could use the ports to deny passage to U.S. ships. He wrote, "It appears that we have given away the farm without a shot being fired."

The implications of Chinese involvement are enormous. Admiral Thomas Moorer describes the scenario well:

Thanks to Bill Clinton and China's recent, wholesale acquisition of U.S. military technology, China is now building weapons of mass destruction at breakneck speed and rapidly becoming a global military power. Control of the Panama Canal will give Communist China a beachhead for expanded aggression in Latin America and direct assault on the U.S. ("Analysis: America risks a nuclear Pearl Harbor," Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, November 17, 1999)


Who knows how "far behind" China actually is so far as military tech goes. Especially if it is an insider plan.


[edit on 25-5-2010 by Northwarden]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   


Who needs aircraft carriers when there are technologies that have made that relic of warfare redundant?


I politely ask, WTF are you talking about?

Aircraft carriers are as far from "relics of warfare" as you can get. You do realize to win any war these days you need air superiority right? If you are fighting or invading a country half way around the world then how in the heck would you maintain air superiority without a Naval battlegroup with aircraft carriers?

Don't bring up ICBMs, as that point is moot. It is the same assurance of mutual destruction that negates the use of those to gain a strategic advantage betweem the US, Russia and China (among others).

This thread is discussing China "CONQUERING" the United States, not the U.S. conquering China.

You expect China to be able to move millions of troops into our country without AIR SUPERIORITY?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Let me say that this is the last thing I want to see happen to the US, about on par with a US invasion of Canada or Mexico. There is a lot of speculation and consideration about it for the past twenty years however.
It seems like this isn't an issue that's on the verge of fading, in fact, we are hearing more dire warnings about it. If so, I hope some actual intelligence can be pinned down, to generate the awareness and tactical preparation required for counter-measures in time.


However, as a student of history, and a former intelligence analyst, I see another world growing up around us. One the media ignores, the politicians refuse to recognize, and one of which the American people remain ignorant. It is a world in which we are surrounded, being infiltrated, and readied for invasion.

To understand what his happening today, one must understand certain military tenets of warfare. These include:

Infiltrate the enemy country with advance forces and spies.
Pre-position supplies close to the anticipated battleground.
Destroy the enemy’s will to resist.
Destroy the enemy population’s morals and morale.
Sew confusion among the enemy population.
Cut lines of communication.
Create diversions.
Control all information and media outlets.
Attack on many fronts.
Destroy the enemy’s capability to wage war.
Reduce or destroy enemy’s military bases.

Strike only when ready and when enemy is at his weakest.
In the intelligence world, what we do is take pieces of information, like pieces of a puzzle, and “put them on the wall and see what picture develops.” Lord Wellington of Waterloo once said “I’ve spent my entire military career wondering what the chap on the other side of the hill was doing.” In intelligence circles, information gathering is chief among tasks, followed by “okay, what are they up to?”


newswithviews.com...



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by tauempire
and besides that...if it ever came to war im certain the united states would win. why?

1) numbers dont matter as much anymore. its good to have as many boots on the ground as you can. But china could never field as many people as it claims it can. Training,arming,and feeding soldiers is expensive. unless china will just hand each person a rifle and say "defend the motherland". which would make them fodder to be blown to shreads quite easily.

2) even though china has more ground troops and tanks. The united states has the largest airforce and navy in the world. china has the third largest airforce but even then its light years behind the united states. the USA has 5,000 aircraft and bombers. the second place russia only has 2,000. and the united states is planing on building 2,000 more.

3)aircraft carriers. china has only 1 aircraft carrier and is planing to build 2 more bring there total to 3. The united states has 11 aircraft carriers and is planing to build TEN MORE!! so when china has 3 aircraft carriers the united states will have 15+ and GROWING EVERY YEAR.

4) Even though china has more tanks the USA has 9,000+ m1a1 abrahms. which is according to many experts a rival to germanys leo 2 for best tank in the world. the united states has a good number of tanks while the quality of them is second only to germanys.

5)The united states has the largest helecopter force in the world and the deadliest attack chopper ever built. in desert storm the apache and m1a1 abrahms took out over a 1,000 iraqi tanks with almost ZERO casualties. that nullifies chinas tank numbers.

6) even though china has all these great numbers...all of its equipment i have been talking about. airforce....tanks..navy,etc. ITS ALL DECADES OLD. heck china even has hundreds of jet fighters FROM THE VIETNAM era.

most of its tanks are from the 70s and 80s.

if the united states wanted to...china would get there ass whooped.




Thank you
People need to understand that the United States of America has the best Weapons, Pilots, and even if china were to try to invade the USA our Citizens could probably defeat them, think of it like this you hear on the radio or something the Chinese are about to invade you could bet that you would see all of our gun wielding American “vets, gangsters, bikers, and everyone else including the illegal immigrants”



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   
The answer is absolutly...NO!
Any question like this must be framed as "who gains"?
What would China gain? Another 300 million to feed and administer to?
I think China has both problems and plans of it's own that don't include conquering the US. Invading the US would be a long, costly, difficult thing, and to what end?
As for the
"communist" thing: guess none of you noticed that that went away long ago. When there is money to be made, few people are Communists.! I think totalitarianism is being confused with Communism here.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Is the North Korea thing actually the beginning of a full-out war against the US from China? Are they doing it to obtain the debt we owe them and because they want to take over the world?

I don't think so. It seems to me there is a good possibility of a general consensus between China, Russia and US/EU/NWO.

I saw someone say China/Russia are actually running drills to go into Korea. Perhaps China & Russia will deal with Korea, while the US/EU/NWO work on Iran. After that, whether the big 3 decide to make a move on one another... I doubt it, because such a war with advanced weapons (ie. free energy, tesla tech, scalar) could easily irreversibly harm the planet and/or destroy both sides completely.

China, Russia and US/EU/NWO might have some sort of agreement for the "New World" once all the rogue threats are eliminated...

That's my theory today - it'll probably change tomorrow.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Not to mention that the Chinese have a 200 million man army.


But not many trans-ocean landing craft to shift such an army.

Come on guys. Take a sip from the cup of reality.

Regards



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


Why would they attack us when they already own us? They have lent us money while people in their rural areas starve. They have their reasons -- they have negated our financial power and are basically like our credit card provider.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
/First post on ATS. Please bear with me. =)

"Is China preparing to conquer the United States?"

In what sense?

If we are talking about the Chinese occupying US soil, I don't see how that can happen. The impossible logistics of transporting troops has already been discussed. It's not like they will be moving their troops in shipping containers. (Tasteless reference to illegal immigrants, I know.)
MY ANSWER: Doesn't matter, won't happen.

Financially, for the time being anyway, China needs the US as much as the US needs China. In my opinion, it'd be like killing the goose that lays the golden eggs for China to sabotage that market. However, money from the US is heavily leaking to China. That is, until Americans, and others, will work for quarters to the hour.
MY ANSWER: China has conquer the world with their "slave labor" for a while now. (Slave labor is a relative term. The Chinese people I know seem to work a lot for very little pay but, to them, it's normal.)

My $0.02. Thanks for reading.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Here's the latest comment from the White House regarding our debt to China:

Updates with quote from Clinton in the fifth paragraph.)

By Nicole Gaouette

May 25 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she is unconcerned about China being the largest holder of U.S. Treasury bonds.

“I don’t worry about the fact that it’s China, I worry that the United States has too big a deficit and too big a debt,” Clinton said today in an interview in Beijing with China Central Television.

China has built up the world’s largest foreign currency reserves by selling its own currency to maintain an almost two- year-old peg against the dollar, buying Treasuries in the process. The U.S. is pushing Asia’s fastest-growing economy to let the yuan appreciate, arguing it hurts American competitiveness.

Clinton, in Beijing with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner for the annual Strategic and Economic Dialogue, said China will over time have to invest more in its own development to increase domestic demand. President Barack Obama has launched an initiative to double U.S. exports in five years and promoting increased demand with China is key to that strategy.

“At some point the Chinese economy will have to turn somewhat inward,” Clinton said in the television interview. “China needs to put money into internal development and the increase of internal demand. We think it’s the right thing to do for China.”

China’s Treasury holdings rose 2 percent in March to $895.2 billion, the biggest increase since July, the Treasury Department said on May 17.







www.businessweek.com...





[edit on 25-5-2010 by manta78]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shark VA84


Aircraft carriers are as far from "relics of warfare" as you can get. You do realize to win any war these days you need air superiority right? If you are fighting or invading a country half way around the world then how in the heck would you maintain air superiority without a Naval battlegroup with aircraft carriers?

Don't bring up ICBMs, as that point is moot. It is the same assurance of mutual destruction that negates the use of those to gain a strategic advantage betweem the US, Russia and China (among others).

This thread is discussing China "CONQUERING" the United States, not the U.S. conquering China.

You expect China to be able to move millions of troops into our country without AIR SUPERIORITY?


We have already established that China couldn't occupy the US. They don't have the infrastructure both in country and in military.

Also, Aircraft Carriers are powerful tools, but the basic geopolitical Heartland-Rim Theory shows that unless you can put boots on the ground in the key bottlenecks in Eurasia, sea power is only a power of nuisance. Don't quote Kosovo either as an example of Air power being superior, because it isn't. If that was the case we'd have been out of Afghanistan 5 years ago.

The key thought when addressing the Aircraft carrier is that it is the top tech in the world today. China has a unique position of being able to build its forces and weapon compliments to counter any threat by the US. They have been ordering massive numbers of Russian SAM's and 4th generation fighters. F-22's don't play a role here because they have a ferry range of only 1200 miles and a combat radius of 600 miles. This puts them in easy pickings range of land and sub based cruise missiles. US bases are well known and China would likely already have targeting plans for them. With only a 600 mile combat radius you can bet the F-22 would only be able to be based in Japan or South Korea in order to be effective. A stealth plane on the ground is just as vulnerable as any other.

I apologize for wandering from what I meant to say, but to get back to the Aircraft carrier. In 2006, a Chinese sub got within torpedo range of the USS Kitty Hawk before even being detected. Sure it was peace time, but supposedly the area around a carrier is supposed to be a fortress at sea and the Chinese were able to violate it very well. Also a large number of smaller destroyer-type ships could launch missiles or unmanned drones in order to harass or defeat a major fleet presence using satellite tracking and recon while still being under land SAM and fighter cover.

Also the F-35 version that will be deployed to the Carriers hasn't been fully put into production yet to my knowledge, or if it has, hasn't been produced in enough numbers to start forming new Squadrons. So for right now, the Stealth factor is limited to the B-2 and B-1A on the side of the US (seeing as how the F-117A was retired not too long ago).

I have to give credit to Robert Kaplan again from his article. It is a wonderful piece titled: The Geography of Chinese Power Found in the latest Foreign Affairs journal (made by the Council on Foreign Relations no less). It is the main article. Unfortunately you have to pay to read it on the website, but any university could get you access easily with the information I've given you, and if you want more feel free to U2U me.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   
My theory is Russia/China will deal with NK while NWO/US/EU take on Iran.

Who knows.

There are a lot of scary possibilities.

I try not to focus on them...

Although I feel really bad for the Iranian people. They seem pretty cool.

I definitely fear for the American people, but don't think they're in immediate danger.... Iran + NK first, imo.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join