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.

 

China’s Military Threatens America: ‘We Will Hurt You’.

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
You dont need a calculator to do the math you need to figure out to come to the conclusion CHINA IS COMING FOR RESOURCES OUT OF NEED,THEY CANT BUY ENOUGH AND THEY KNOW IT.

They will hit population centers in a first strike attempt to force surrender through attrition and shock to the population,they witnessed the twin towers and think the time is ripe.

Allies dont matter as much as people think and China wont skirmish its way to the top as Germany tried to do,they wil STRIKE WITH EVERYTHING THEY HAVE.

And soon.

The baby boomers have been getting ready for this war their whole lives,they are the bait,I never expected the boomers to surrender the future without a fight.They will level the playing field as they exit this world,be sure of it,Chinas culture has no idea what true total sacrifice is all about,their culture has been comfortable for thousands of years while many others struggled as pioneer states and countries.The boomers come from TOUGH STOCK .

China is falling for the bait and its to bad,all they have to do is truly integrate their culture on a global scale to avoid this coming event.

Sad thing is that once the dominos start to fall,India will BE FORCED INTO THE DANCE,then China and India will fall totally into the trap.

We will all be madly dancing by then.

At the end of the day I am canadian and I spend my spare time learning to speak Mandarin,not Arabic.

Just so no one feels badly,know this,I live in Canada and yesterday I had my lunch in a small restauraunt run by a half chineese half caucasian woman and an Indian woman,the other three customers in the place were another canasian girl and a chineese girl at one table and an Arab man trying to attract their attention at another table,but even in Canada things are as they are in every other country,cultures stick tightly together and there is no true integration.

For example people might think there is very little racially motivated crime in canada,but realise that Every crime is committed against ANOTHER RACE because of the composition of our population.

Even we think we have very little racially motivated crime.

China is coming and we can try to mix cultures globally but they are still coming,it is to late to integrate,THEY MUST DOMINATE TO AS THEY SEE IT survive.




posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Lmfao.. If china wanted to hurt the u.s they wouldnt have to fire a shot.. Just call in the note on the loans they make and bankrupt your arses. Dizzy City just crying because china wont become yet another u.s puppet as they know full well what becomes of countries that become u.s puppets.. Besides at the rate your politicians are taking your freedom you should be more afraid of them than of china.. At least china is gradually giving its people more freedom..



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Are all of you high? we dwarf china militarily!

Our airforce is triple the size of chinas.

USA AIRFORCE- 5,200

CHINA AIRFORCE- 1,900

Not only that but china's majority of fighters and bombers are vietnam era and wold be massacred by american fighters.

Our navy is the largest on the earth.

USA NAVY SHIPS-1,559

CHINA NAVY SHIPS-760

Once again and these are vietnam era and need to be upgraded.

USA DESTROYERS-50

CHINA DESTROYERS-21

USA FRIGATES-92

CHINA FRIGATES-42

And finally we have the aircraft carriers for which the united states has no one even close to being equal.

USA AIRCRAFT CARRIERS-11

CHINA-1

china plans to build 2 more which would bring there total to three.....while the USA plans to build 7-10 more.

Keep in mind that the US aircraft carriers can stay in the water 24/7 seven days a week because of the nuclear reactor in the carriers.

None of you have ANY idea how outmatched china is.



[edit on 16-6-2010 by empireofpain]



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Expat888
Lmfao.. If china wanted to hurt the u.s they wouldnt have to fire a shot.. Just call in the note on the loans they make and bankrupt your arses. Dizzy City just crying because china wont become yet another u.s puppet as they know full well what becomes of countries that become u.s puppets.. Besides at the rate your politicians are taking your freedom you should be more afraid of them than of china.. At least china is gradually giving its people more freedom..


Debt means -snip-.

Go ask the french about that. look it up. educate yourself.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Expat888
Lmfao.. If china wanted to hurt the u.s they wouldnt have to fire a shot.. Just call in the note on the loans they make and bankrupt your arses. Dizzy City just crying because china wont become yet another u.s puppet as they know full well what becomes of countries that become u.s puppets.. Besides at the rate your politicians are taking your freedom you should be more afraid of them than of china.. At least china is gradually giving its people more freedom..

Not to be mean but where are you from? If you are a Brit (or European!) then having politicians removing freedoms is something that you should be very familiar with. China can barely afford to feed its own people. Its smoke and mirrors. Its a curious state over in the far east because even though they are appearing more open they are still a pretty closed society.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by one4all
The baby boomers have been getting ready for this war their whole lives,they are the bait,I never expected the boomers to surrender the future without a fight.They will level the playing field as they exit this world,be sure of it,Chinas culture has no idea what true total sacrifice is all about,their culture has been comfortable for thousands of years while many others struggled as pioneer states and countries.The boomers come from TOUGH STOCK .


Not sure if I'm understanding you right here. Are you referring to Americans when you say "baby boomers"?

You surely can't be saying that China has has a softer history than the US? I have no idea what you could be basing that upon? Remember the Long March? The famine that precipitated it? Or the fact that China had its own civil war that bubbled away for a quarter of a century.

In my opinion it is the US that has softened up in the last hundred years. The pioneer spirit seems to be a scarcity now, though it is by no means gone. The same thing happens with any nation that becomes affluent, and it will happen to China once capitalist consumerism and labour-saving technology have had the effect they have already had on all the western nations.

For those who say that an all out war with the Chinese would be a walk over, and that the only reason that the US has suffered any defeats or stale-mates is the fault of politicians, I ask for an example to the contrary. WWII is a skewed example, but the closest to true all-out conflict the US has been involved in, in the past century anyway. Political restrictions on slaughter will always be a reality, and for good reason: The American population (with the obvious exception of a few of the more hawkish posters on ATS) will not stand for out-and-out barbarity on the part of their armies and leaders, unless barbarity has already been visited on them as in the case of Nazi Germany and their Japanese allies.

Iraq and Afghanistan are cases in point. What have the technological superiority, uncontested mastery of the airspace and hugely higher military budget done for the US in these conflicts?

Who would have believed that a country like Afghanistan, prior to 2000, could do anything other than be anhihilated by the US in the event of an invasion, even after the Soviets had slunk out of the country with its tail between its legs? We all know why this is the case, and I do not cast ANY aspersions on the fighting US soldiery or it's leaders. An anhihilation would have been politically intolerable and so a puppet administration is installed and the war inevitably becomes an insurgency, thereby negating all the technology, money and superbly trained fighting men that the US can muster.

The same situation would apply in a war with the Chinese. An all-out conflict is not going to happen. It would be a series of proxy wars and economic sklirmishes, andthere will always be the over-riding issue of civilian deaths.

Edited for typos, couldn't do much about the rambling I'm afraid.

[edit on 16-6-2010 by Karilla]



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by empireofpain
Are all of you high? we dwarf china militarily!

Our airforce is triple the size of chinas.

USA AIRFORCE- 5,200

CHINA AIRFORCE- 1,900

Not only that but china's majority of fighters and bombers are vietnam era and wold be massacred by american fighters.

Our navy is the largest on the earth.

USA NAVY SHIPS-1,559

CHINA NAVY SHIPS-760

Once again and these are vietnam era and need to be upgraded.

USA DESTROYERS-50

CHINA DESTROYERS-21

USA FRIGATES-92

CHINA FRIGATES-42

And finally we have the aircraft carriers for which the united states has no one even close to being equal.

USA AIRCRAFT CARRIERS-11

CHINA-1

china plans to build 2 more which would bring tehere total to three.....while the USA plans to build 7-10 more.

Keep in mind that the US aircraft carriers can stay in the water 24/7 seven days a week because of the nuclear reactor in the carriers.

None of you have ANY idea how outmatched china is.



This is typical teenage thinking.

China has the technology to keep 90% of those 5200 US fighter out of the immediate engagement of China. Not all of these 5200 fighter can be stationed on a carrier or on a base close to action.

Initially most of these fighter would be trying to out run Chinese sophisticated air defence missiles, before they use the rest of their fuel to shoot down Chinese air crafts. Or out run the second wave of AA missiles.

My bet is that some of these jets wont have a carrier or a nearby base to land on after the initial attack. Because it will have been wiped out by china. Or be under Chinese missile attack. And you cant land fighter in a base or on a carrier that is under a missile attack.

The US navy would probably have to stay far away from China's missile reach until at least 70% of china's attack capabilities are reduced.

The only card the US really has to play against china, is the success of their own long range cruise and ballistic missiles.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by empireofpainNone of you have ANY idea how outmatched china is.


If it was always (or ever?) a matter of numbers of ships involved in a naval encounter, disregarding the lack of an appropriate modern theatre in which to stage such a naval engagement in the modern era, The US would have been soundly defeated by the Japanese in the Pacific, Nelson would have had his arse handed to him by the combined French and Spanish fleets at Trafalgar and Drake's pitifully small fleet would have been sunk without trace by the Spanish Armada.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla

Originally posted by empireofpainNone of you have ANY idea how outmatched china is.


If it was always (or ever?) a matter of numbers of ships involved in a naval encounter, disregarding the lack of an appropriate modern theatre in which to stage such a naval engagement in the modern era, The US would have been soundly defeated by the Japanese in the Pacific, Nelson would have had his arse handed to him by the combined French and Spanish fleets at Trafalgar and Drake's pitifully small fleet would have been sunk without trace by the Spanish Armada.


True but keep in mind that the united states navy is the most technologically advanced trained navy in the world.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by gixxerblade

Originally posted by Expat888
Lmfao.. If china wanted to hurt the u.s they wouldnt have to fire a shot.. Just call in the note on the loans they make and bankrupt your arses. Dizzy City just crying because china wont become yet another u.s puppet as they know full well what becomes of countries that become u.s puppets.. Besides at the rate your politicians are taking your freedom you should be more afraid of them than of china.. At least china is gradually giving its people more freedom..

Not to be mean but where are you from? If you are a Brit (or European!) then having politicians removing freedoms is something that you should be very familiar with. China can barely afford to feed its own people. Its smoke and mirrors. Its a curious state over in the far east because even though they are appearing more open they are still a pretty closed society.

Asia .. And I regularly travel to china both on business and to visit friends there.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by empireofpain
True but keep in mind that the united states navy is the most technologically advanced trained navy in the world.


They said that about the Japanese Navy in WWII. Couple this to the fact that the US Navy was seriously knocked back after Pearl Harbour and it should have been a foregone conclusion.

Trouble is there are no foregone conclusions in war. This is why the decision to go to war should only ever be made by men who have been to war themselves.

Nobody can predict the outcome of a full-scale conflict between the US and China, unless it is a prediction that it would be bad for everyone involved... and those not directly involved too.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by empireofpain

Originally posted by Karilla

Originally posted by empireofpainNone of you have ANY idea how outmatched china is.


If it was always (or ever?) a matter of numbers of ships involved in a naval encounter, disregarding the lack of an appropriate modern theatre in which to stage such a naval engagement in the modern era, The US would have been soundly defeated by the Japanese in the Pacific, Nelson would have had his arse handed to him by the combined French and Spanish fleets at Trafalgar and Drake's pitifully small fleet would have been sunk without trace by the Spanish Armada.


True but keep in mind that the united states navy is the most technologically advanced trained navy in the world.


Well to be honest that is only been proven compared to a 3d world capability of defence. America is after Israel, the supreme nation best prepared to fight victorious over a defenseless nation. That is the only proof we have of American capability after ww2. And yeah its damn impressive



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by empireofpain
 


Hey the Brits said the same thing once. We had an Empire on which the sun never set. The largest and most powerful navy in the world. Impenetrable fortresses and an economy and army the envy of the entire world. Only took 3 countries doing things we didn't think they could do to take us down.

We'd say things like "Japanese will never be good pilots, they can't launch an air attack"

"The Germans can't beat France because of the Marginot line, the French have the finest army in the world"

The reason we lost. And the only reason. Was our arrogance, and our complacence. We took what we had for granted and became fat and lazy on our stolen wealth. You're making the same mistake and you don't think it can ever end.

It can. And it will.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
the brit commander in Afghanistan just said that the war is not winnable

afganistan is a fraction of china

i don't know how you get around that fact



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
the brit commander in Afghanistan just said that the war is not winnable

afganistan is a fraction of china

i don't know how you get around that fact



Yeah, yesterday the head general of the American forces leading this war on terror fainted under a hearing when he was asked a question about Afghanistan. I guess he has a lot on his mind.

Funny no one has made a post about it her on ATS.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


People don't understand Afghanistan isn't really a real war. And it's hard to actually subdue a country with a population of 20 million or so and bring them under compliance with a small force.

They've got no concept of what total war is like because they won't research, or they watch propaganda. Total war means just that.

And they talk about "So what if China has a billion" it's not feasible to just go in and have a little shock and awe campaign and land the marines and then go around hunting "insurgents" with a force of 300,000 regardless of how many carriers you have.

Any war between the US will be a brutal, very long (maybe decades) and draining war that will see millions die on both sides. The US casualties in Afghanistan are like what? 3000?

Maybe when the USA actually gets attacked on it's own soil in a real fashion they'll lose their hunger for war.


[edit on 16-6-2010 by belial259]



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
Funny no one has made a post about it her on ATS.


They have, here:

General Petraeus passing out during senate armed services committee meeting

[edit on 16-6-2010 by Karilla]



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
In a shooting war China's merchant fleet is history.

Why because its owned by the Chinese military. This makes it a military target.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.warisboring.com...

and the Chinese government want to build 1000 nuclear merchant ships.

Wipe out there merchant fleet and you takeout there supply lines.

You also take out there ability to ship products and get oil from the rest of the world.

China's merchant fleet is there lifeline and without it they are history.

Now the US has a very small merchant fleet (422 ships)and most ships of other countries are not US flagged and could be diverted to Mexico and unloaded and trucked to the US.
This would make them neutral shipping and not a legitimate target for China.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla

Originally posted by spy66
Funny no one has made a post about it her on ATS.


They have, here:

General Petraeus passing out during senate armed services committee meeting

[edit on 16-6-2010 by Karilla]


Ok, there you go. I must of missed it.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


Well you make a decent point that a merchant fleet is the lifeblood of a nation. But remember the US consumes more than any other country in the world and is just as reliant on foreign sources and shipping.

What you're saying about legitimate targets doesn't really apply if you examine WW2, where basically everything was a legitimate target by the end of it. You think a few merchant vessels or non military targets is going to matter in Total War? Or that people are still going to follow the law? The Israeli's don't. Why would the Chinese?

Total War


Total war is a war limitless in its scope in which a belligerent engages in the mobilization of all their available resources, in order to render beyond use their rival's capacity for resistance.

The practice of total war has been in use for centuries, but it was only in the middle to late 19th century that total war was identified by scholars as a separate class of warfare. In a total war, there is less and sometimes no differentiation between combatants and non-combatants (civilians) than in other conflicts, as nearly every human resource, civilians and soldiers alike, can be considered to be part of the belligerent effort.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join