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.

 

Chinese Troops Deploying In North Korea

page: 20
47
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Great new thread that show the facts

Meet The New Boss: China Owns The United States


The average American family with two children collectively owes around $12,000 dollars to China. The Communist state’s ownership of long term U.S. Treasury Securities means the United States pays upwards of $100 million dollars a day to China in terms of interest alone.

China’s huge accumulation of US dollars gives it the sway to lead the United States by the nose like a sheep to slaughter, holding in its hands the power to decide the economic destiny of the now collapsing American empire. The culmination of this process moved a step closer this week when Hu Jintao made it clear


Main reason that .. Obama would never dare something to upset China
Hilary didnt get the messages


Next US President will be from China

edit on 1/19/2011 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
is this official confirming news that this indeed is going on? or is this false news? I do not want to read 6 pages to find out.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River
is this official confirming news that this indeed is going on? or is this false news? I do not want to read 6 pages to find out.


some say its false .. some say its real
The news wasnt pick up very much ... why ?

we know that our modern MSM are controlled .. there is maybe a reason behind this secrecy ,,

so far its speculation and rumors since the news was just release .. how can we know for sure they have chinese troops in NK .. do we have a contact in NK that can confirm this.. ? no
why would they tell us the truth about it ..
China was probably stationning troops in NK for quite a time .. that would be logic .. but why confirming it now ?

so many questions regarding the Koreas .. i know



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Lets be honest, china eating a nice dinner with Obama during China's invasion. This would make china blush, also Obama would stick and wave his finger at the face of prime minster of china. Did I get that right? Prime minster of china, I dont know the gov stuff in china, correct me if I am wrong
edit on 19-1-2011 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


My initial thinking is China is postureing much like Russia does at times. China can not lose face.
Who would win a war, America! Clearly the U.S could gain air superiority, once that happened game over. However if the U.S tried to invade i think the population with over a billion people would win. As for a war on the ground in NK, i think the same outcome as last time, a tie. With NK becomeing part of the Peoples Republic.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by marinesniper0351
 


No one around the world doubts the U.S.M.C (only fools), but the assumption that the battle hardened troop will always win is questionable. Look what happened the last time Israel invaded Lebanon it certainly was not a resounding victory, and looked more like a defeat.

He who is prudent and lies in wait for an enemy who is not, will be victorious.
Sun Tzu

So my point is over confidence, as my good friend points out, and the belief you know your enemy when you do not can lead to dissaster.
As a U.S marine i would have thought the 1st battle of Fallujah would remind you of this.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


We know that the US is still stuck in the ME with 2 big expensive trillions dollars wars

they cant afford any other wars that would implicate ground troops
the only chance they have to win a next war would be with missiles .. rockets ... ICBMs with nukes etc ...
by doing this .. they will loose the face in front of the world .. since many civilians will die .. again

the US superiority is blinding the risks ... the consequences can be very grave
one thing we know for sure .. people know that the US used nukes on civilians ..

Hitler... Stalin or even Saddam couldnt do a better score of killing .. all together

the american foreign policy will cause devastation .. and it take only one war to loose

you CANT win a war outside the US vs the army .. you have to bring it inside to have chances of success
why China again have so many troops ? did they planned an invasion in the past and are still considering it
since it now own the US with its debts.. they will say to the UN that the US invasion was legal lol

i dont say it will become reality .. but the chances are there .. its plausible



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ben81
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


We know that the US is still stuck in the ME with 2 big expensive trillions dollars wars

they cant afford any other wars that would implicate ground troops
the only chance they have to win a next war would be with missiles .. rockets ... ICBMs with nukes etc ...
by doing this .. they will loose the face in front of the world .. since many civilians will die .. again

the US superiority is blinding the risks ... the consequences can be very grave
one thing we know for sure .. people know that the US used nukes on civilians ..

Hitler... Stalin or even Saddam couldnt do a better score of killing .. all together

the american foreign policy will cause devastation .. and it take only one war to loose

you CANT win a war outside the US vs the army .. you have to bring it inside to have chances of success
why China again have so many troops ? did they planned an invasion in the past and are still considering it
since it now own the US with its debts.. they will say to the UN that the US invasion was legal lol

i dont say it will become reality .. but the chances are there .. its plausible


No not plausible at all! Ever heard of mutually assured destruction?
The U.S did use nukes on Japan but to compare their "score" to the deaths inflicted by individual dictators in controll of GER/USSR/IRAQ for a short period of time is silly. Clearly any country with a long history will have lots of blood on its hands. Even still i think the total deaths of WW2, which to some extent can mostly be laid at Hitlers door, probably still outweigh those of the entire of U.S history.
I believe that the droping of them A-Bombs probably saved a lot more lives than it cost,even if i am loathed to say that. Look at Okinawa that ,as far as i understand, made up their minds.
And im fairly sure the U.S could win a war vs a army if they wanted, but it would be a total war and no one wants that.

Im from the U.K so no bias, just dont like U.S bashing. Im sure ultimately you guys try to do what you think is best,most of the time anyway.

edit on 19-1-2011 by Rocketman1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


If we could have went in without kid gloves and without concern for civilian casualties then it would have been a different story. We are not trained to be police nor be held back and constrained, this is why we have difficulties because we care about innocent life (the average Marine). Have you ever server in the military, I did 2 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Being told to not fire until fired upon, being told no civilian casualties but risk your neck to get the enemy and use light weaponry in a war zone. This is why we have problems we are not 100% committed to winning as we were against Japan. We should have laid waste with a powerful weapon and then helped them to re-build as we did with Japan and Germany. Look how they turned out...

Do you think China would care about civilian casualties like the we do...? When they beat and kill monks for god sake...

I pray to Allah and thank him that people like you have no real power other than with your posts...real power is having someone in your sights and knowing that you can end their life at anytime, a decision I had to make many times and pray to Allah for forgiveness after.

Peace is not a reality and if you think sitting in front of your computer being a big all intelligent man will help...it wont...the world and people will not change. At the end when its just someone like you and someone like me staring at each other the physically stronger and trained warrior will win...this is not war craft...



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


i have been to the US many time .. its great and love the people there
im only bashing the US government foreign policies .. they do not work and never will
thats why they need to change it before its to late .. no ones want a big war or mutual destruction

a mutual destruction will only happen if both are shooting all their missiles at each other
even russia know that ( cold war ) but a surprise ground troop invasion .. would change everything



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by marinesniper0351
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


If we could have went in without kid gloves and without concern for civilian casualties then it would have been a different story. We are not trained to be police nor be held back and constrained, this is why we have difficulties because we care about innocent life (the average Marine). Have you ever server in the military, I did 2 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Being told to not fire until fired upon, being told no civilian casualties but risk your neck to get the enemy and use light weaponry in a war zone. This is why we have problems we are not 100% committed to winning as we were against Japan. We should have laid waste with a powerful weapon and then helped them to re-build as we did with Japan and Germany. Look how they turned out...

Do you think China would care about civilian casualties like the we do...? When they beat and kill monks for god sake...

I pray to Allah and thank him that people like you have no real power other than with your posts...real power is having someone in your sights and knowing that you can end their life at anytime, a decision I had to make many times and pray to Allah for forgiveness after.

Peace is not a reality and if you think sitting in front of your computer being a big all intelligent man will help...it wont...the world and people will not change. At the end when its just someone like you and someone like me staring at each other the physically stronger and trained warrior will win...this is not war craft...


Clearly the rules of engagement troops of all nations operate under now will be a hinderance, but to go back to my earlier example of israel/lebanon "the physically stronger and trained warrior " did not win. If it was all about who was stronger Guerilla warfare would not be something the U.S train their special forces to teach to friendly peoples behind enemy lines. But they do because even a relatively small force of inferior troops who are highly motivated and well organised can have a massively disproportianate effect on a larger and superior force.
And im sorry real power is sending someone like you to die for whatever the order of the day maybe without ever needing to leave a desk. Ask your president he could if he wished kill a lot more people with the press of a button than you could ever kill in a life time.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


Yes/No they would need to get amonst big civilian areas where a nuke could not be used, no nation would kill tens of millions of its people. And very few nations in the world with a important standing get thing right all the time. People just focus on the U.S because it was the sole super power for a few years. But the U.N frequently has a lot to answer for and i dont see them geting attacked all the time.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   
China has so much to lose by helping in a korean war, the only reason i would see that there soldiers are in Nk, would be to keep the peace, or take over for themselves, which the world wouldent let them do.

Dont forget china an russia have a pretty big border, and im sure they dont care too much about each other, unless its to make the west look stupid.

So no worries people, the world wont blow up anytime soon\


just my 2 cents



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:29 AM
link   
Forgive my ignorance, but what makes North Korea a "rogue state" as stated in the OP?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Ben81
 


China is definitely not "THE" superpower. Their cutting edge weapons being unveiled have finally caught up with our 20 year old common technology, and despite popular opinion we don't owe them a very large percentage of our national debt. We owe the vast majority of it to ourselves, and after that Japan ranks #1. On top of all that, North Korea already had the largest standing army in the world, so a few more Chinese infantrymen really makes no difference, and our Carrier groups do not care how many men are on the ground, because they are 100 miles offshore lobbing million dollar weapons at their targets.

If the article is true, it is concerning that China has chosen this approach instead of reigning in the NK government, but most diplomatic news is saying the opposite. It is more likely that any Chinese troops in NK would be there to watch the NK government and assist the US in keeping a lid on things in the region.


This is mostly hogwash. Carrier groups are completely obsolete against an opponent with antiship capability, and the next large conflict will prove that. China's latest exhibitions at the 2010 Dubai arms fair showcased multiple technologies for destroying US carriers.

What this means, is that if any strikes are made against North Korea, there will be collateral damage to Chinese troops, which will give them casus belli.

Our massively expensive super weapons have never been tested against a capable foe, only against dirt-poor countries on the edge of internal collapse.

China has a stealth fighter prototype now, and unlike the USA is massively invested in manufacturing. They have state-owned and controlled defense firms, and can run on much less money and tighter schedules than our own announce-bid-protype-evaluate-procure system. Of course, you know all this already, and just want to cheerlead team USA. Nothing wrong with keeping up morale, but remember NSD 130. The word conquers, but may be doing so illegally.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by HattoriHanzou
 


I dont know, if you get yourself one of them billion pound new type 45's us Brits have got that should have a good chance of takeing out whatever the Chin's have got


en.wikipedia.org...

on the other hand that is a little over confident

edit on 20-1-2011 by Rocketman1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by HattoriHanzou
 


I have said repeatedly that I don't believe the US and China will ever come directly into a conflict. Both countries have far more to lose than to gain. I am only cheerleading the USA because of naive posts like yours.

Yes, China just unveiled a stealth fighter, in its testing phase, and if it goes to production it will be better than the F-22, which has already seen 15 years combat for the US and is already 2 generations behind the F-35, which is also already on the way out the door to make way for the next generation, which is already one or two generations behind stuff we are testing secretly. So, in case you missed the math, China's "new" stealth fighter being tested is at least 5 generations behind our development phase, and at least 3 generations behind fighters we already have in mass production.

Yes, China has a weapon capable of sinking a carrier. Why is this a surprise? It isn't all that difficult to sink a million tons of steel suspended on top of a watery grave. The difficult part is getting your weapon to the carrier, which is highly unlikely. Our missile defenses have come a long, long way, and chances are their weapon would never reach its target, BUT that isn't the biggest deterrent. The biggest deterrent is the repercussions for such an action. Sinking a carrier would be worse than 9/11. If China decided to actually sink a carrier, they would have to be fully prepared for all out engagement with the United States. We might go tit for tat in the Koreas or in Somalia, and responses might be proportional and appropriate, but if they sink a carrier it will mean all out war. Regardless of who has the best military, an all out war between superpowers would change the face of the world for centuries! It would crush economies, set technology back decades, and undo all the progress of the last 100 years. China doesn't want that, and neither does the US. They will never attempt to sink one of our carriers.

In case anybody forgot, the US blew up a Chinese Embassy, killed many people, and China did nothing about it. Of course, we apologized and said it was an accident, but the fact is, we got away with it.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
This is mostly hogwash. Carrier groups are completely obsolete against an opponent with antiship capability, and the next large conflict will prove that. China's latest exhibitions at the 2010 Dubai arms fair showcased multiple technologies for destroying US carriers.


AND....

This is why China is investing billions in trying to create it's own vulnerable carrier fleet?

Chinese aircraft carrier

Since the 1970s, the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has expressed interest in operating an aircraft carrier as part of its blue water aspirations, and press reports have frequently quoted senior Chinese military officials as expressing an intention to build aircraft carriers.....

In late 2008, and through early 2009, there have been foreign reports that China will start building two 50,000-60,000 ton aircraft carriers due to be finished by 2015.[1][3] Whether the two ships will be similar to the Varyag (ski jump) or American carriers (catapult) or even if these reports are accurate, is not yet known.



Our massively expensive super weapons have never been tested against a capable foe, only against dirt-poor countries on the edge of internal collapse.

AND....

They haven't fought a real world power either. They didn't do that great in 79 against Vietnam.
So whats your point?

Also that argument doesn't hold water. They said the same thing before Gulf war 1. Saying the M1 and Apache weren't battle tested or they wouldn't perform etc. Meanwhile Saddam had some of the best Soviet hardware money could buy and it turned out to be garbage. Now the Chinese have cheap knock offs and other such hardware the majority of which is based on Soviet or Russian designs.


China has a stealth fighter prototype now, and unlike the USA is massively invested in manufacturing. They have state-owned and controlled defense firms, and can run on much less money and tighter schedules than our own announce-bid-protype-evaluate-procure system.


Actually our system works. With different companies competing amongst themselves they drive innovation forward. We've seen their type of State run monopoly in action before. With the Soviet Union. Lack of competition breeds stagnation. But ahh yes, they'll just spy and steal what they need. Go figure.

We've discarded more technologically advanced designs from several decades ago than they are presently testing...

YF-23


The YF-22 and YF-23 were competing in the USAF's Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program, conceived in the early 1980s, to provide a replacement for the F-15 Eagle. Contracts for the two most promising designs were awarded in 1986.[1]




Of course, you know all this already, and just want to cheerlead team USA. Nothing wrong with keeping up morale, but remember NSD 130. The word conquers, but may be doing so illegally.


Some people see an American defending his country as bragging or being arrogant. Go figure, if a Russian or Chinese said the same thing they would get a million stars and support.

People hate the guy who is perceived as on top, Rightly or wrongly we are perceived as on top at the moment and when China becomes a real super power the US will not just disappear, that's what many people here simply don't understand. The Soviet union collapsed yet Russia remained...

Why?

Because they had nukes. Many will mention how ROME collapsed and say we will go the same way.

IMO the world is just returning to a more dangerous state of a "Multi-Polar" world. I feel too many here at ATS are either too young to remember or simply are unaware [ignorant] of the historical reality of how dangerous a multi-polar world really can be.

It doesn't mean the US, Russia or China can kick off WW-III by fighting each other but smaller nuclear armed nations could between themselves. It's an unknown.......

oh well

PEACE
edit on 20-1-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
This is mostly hogwash. Carrier groups are completely obsolete against an opponent with antiship capability, and the next large conflict will prove that. China's latest exhibitions at the 2010 Dubai arms fair showcased multiple technologies for destroying US carriers.


AND....

This is why China is investing billions in trying to create it's own vulnerable carrier fleet?

Chinese aircraft carrier

Since the 1970s, the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has expressed interest in operating an aircraft carrier as part of its blue water aspirations, and press reports have frequently quoted senior Chinese military officials as expressing an intention to build aircraft carriers.....

In late 2008, and through early 2009, there have been foreign reports that China will start building two 50,000-60,000 ton aircraft carriers due to be finished by 2015.[1][3] Whether the two ships will be similar to the Varyag (ski jump) or American carriers (catapult) or even if these reports are accurate, is not yet known.



Our massively expensive super weapons have never been tested against a capable foe, only against dirt-poor countries on the edge of internal collapse.

AND....

They haven't fought a real world power either. They didn't do that great in 79 against Vietnam.
So whats your point?

Also that argument doesn't hold water. They said the same thing before Gulf war 1. Saying the M1 and Apache weren't battle tested or they wouldn't perform etc. Meanwhile Saddam had some of the best Soviet hardware money could buy and it turned out to be garbage. Now the Chinese have cheap knock offs and other such hardware the majority of which is based on Soviet or Russian designs.


China has a stealth fighter prototype now, and unlike the USA is massively invested in manufacturing. They have state-owned and controlled defense firms, and can run on much less money and tighter schedules than our own announce-bid-protype-evaluate-procure system.


Actually our system works. With different companies competing amongst themselves they drive innovation forward. We've seen their type of State run monopoly in action before. With the Soviet Union. Lack of competition breeds stagnation. But ahh yes, they'll just spy and steal what they need. Go figure.

We've discarded more technologically advanced designs from several decades ago than they are presently testing...

YF-23


The YF-22 and YF-23 were competing in the USAF's Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program, conceived in the early 1980s, to provide a replacement for the F-15 Eagle. Contracts for the two most promising designs were awarded in 1986.[1]




Of course, you know all this already, and just want to cheerlead team USA. Nothing wrong with keeping up morale, but remember NSD 130. The word conquers, but may be doing so illegally.


Some people see an American defending his country as bragging or being arrogant. Go figure, if a Russian or Chinese said the same thing they would get a million stars and support.

People hate the guy who is perceived as on top, Rightly or wrongly we are perceived as on top at the moment and when China becomes a real super power the US will not just disappear, that's what many people here simply don't understand. The Soviet union collapsed yet Russia remained...

Why?

Because they had nukes. Many will mention how ROME collapsed and say we will go the same way.

IMO the world is just returning to a more dangerous state of a "Multi-Polar" world. I feel too many here at ATS are either too young to remember or simply are unaware [ignorant] of the historical reality of how dangerous a multi-polar world really can be.

It doesn't mean the US, Russia or China can kick off WW-III by fighting each other but smaller nuclear armed nations could between themselves. It's an unknown.......

oh well

PEACE
edit on 20-1-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)


Whoa, whoa! China is creating a carrier to project power into dirt countries, like we do. They are really interested in Africa at the moment, and there are many nations in their area that do not have a credible anti-ship deterrent. Despite the vulnerability of the carrier, it's still the best way to go grind some poor bastards into dust as long as they are living in dirt in the first place.

They don't expect total war any more than we do, but by positioning their troops in North Korea they are saying, HANDS OFF. We won't really risk attacking North Korea now, because as I said before that would give China casus belli to retaliate against regional targets of their choosing, say our bases in Guam, South Korea, or Japan.

Also your point about Saddam having the best Soviet hardware isn't really accurate. He had stuff from them that was 15 years old at the time, even older. The Soviet hardware isn't as fancy as our stuff, but we never really went head to head against anything of theirs that was of the same generation as our best stuff.

It's one thing to "defend your country" and it's another thing to just spread outright jingoistic, unrealistic assessments of what is really going on. If we are so awesome, why are "100 taliban" which is our current laughable estimate causing us so much grief in Afghanistan?

A true patriot doesn't want to just pump up his nation despite all the facts that may sing to the contrary. Let's look at it this way - we had to cut our stealth fighter programs because we are going broke. China has so much money that they are expanding and modernizing faster than any nation in history. We should be wary of engaging against a foe like that. We may have great tech but with constant budget cutbacks, and with a huge chunk of the remaining money going into occupying two countries we rightly shouldn't give a crap about, our warfighting potential is greatly diminished. Yeah we rolled into Iraq and stomped everything there.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

right?




top topics



 
47
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join