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.
(visit the link for the full news article)
China's return as a superpower concomitant with rapid American decline is evoking a variety of sentiments around the world. While Latin America, Africa, and Greater Middle-East are largely welcoming this shift in power with varying degrees of enthusiasm, and an aging and dissipated Europe is watching it with bemused anxiety, in America it is causing an epic dilemma.
Originally posted by Mdv2
Politicians and academics have often claimed that the competitive position of the US is weakening due to various domestic complexities such as diversion through a widening inequality in income distribution, a hopeless educational system that leads to a lesser ability to sustain innovativeness.
I am of opinion that the US needs to invest heavily in education, infrastructure and a healthy financial climate that relies heavily on taxing corporations, rather than its people. We have seen what the financial climate has done to the US: it created a bubble through gambling and investment abroad, rather than at home. It stimulated corruption, irresponsible risk taking and the "American dream" turned out to be an unsustainable model.
Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
The US empire has been on the fast track of this cycle... the US rose from nothing to world dominance very quickly, in historical terms, and is already declining, with just a facade of strength left, and the US military is being very badly abused. The rise and fall of the US empire, rather than happening over centuries, is happening in just a couple of generations.
Niall Ferguson posits that the life cycles of great powers might not follow the long-accepted pattern of gradual rise and fall. Rather, he says, "it is possible that this whole conceptual framework is, in fact, flawed," and that empires fall quickly and without warning. With that in mind, Ferguson explores what it might mean for the geopolitical status quo.
Originally posted by Recollector
Seriously, China, in order to even come CLOSE to US, will need to spend A LOT on military.Yes, they have the money...what they DO NOT have is the real means to use those money to grow their military.They don't have scientists to build a carrier (if they did, they will already have carriers).
Originally posted by Recollector
However, what China do not have (and probably won't have for like 20-30 years from now on) is POWER PROJECTION.
Anyway, once they start to invest masively overseas (because they will HAVE to do it, to keep up their economic growth) China will need power projection.And this means military : bases, troops, CARRIERS (they have exactly ZERO carriers) AND money to support all those.
Seriously, China, in order to even come CLOSE to US, will need to spend A LOT on military.Yes, they have the money...what they DO NOT have is the real means to use those money to grow their military.
Originally posted by Recollector
I am always amused by topics regarding China and US.
As i previously stated on another topic some time ago, China is not a superpower per se.Yes, they have an economic growth that , eventualy, will surpass US economy in global figures.
However, what China do not have (and probably won't have for like 20-30 years from now on) is POWER PROJECTION.
They cannot protect any economical interests they have overseas.China have a REAL problem with their workforce.I mean, seriously, like 800 million chinese live in rural areas, and presumebly, agricultural.Still, they barely produce food for themselves.US, on the other hand...its first producer of grain and corn.And exporter.
All China growth is just a bubble.They can't even develop their OWN rural areas.How could they even try to invest masively overseas (they invest overseas, but nothing compared to US) ?
Anyway, once they start to invest masively overseas (because they will HAVE to do it, to keep up their economic growth) China will need power projection.And this means military : bases, troops, CARRIERS (they have exactly ZERO carriers) AND money to support all those.
Seriously, China, in order to even come CLOSE to US, will need to spend A LOT on military.Yes, they have the money...what they DO NOT have is the real means to use those money to grow their military.They don't have scientists to build a carrier (if they did, they will already have carriers).
Some might argue that a country don't need carriers to protect their overseas interest.Yes, right, Germany don't have any carrier...BUT they are a NATO member, which HAVE carrier.
Its really stupid to beleive that China will pose a threat to US domination.Not in the next 20+ years.And in 20 years many things can happend.
Yes, for the sake of discusion, we can say that a 1,2 BILLION people country will produce MORE then a 300 million one.So what? China is still a 3rd world country (those 800 million peasants they have are actually extremely poor AND can be considered UNEMPLOYED work force).
Yes, US have issues...but China have BIGGER ones (some almost imposible to solve).
Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by Mdv2
Of course China is rising and the US is bleeding. When the US politicians have been bought off for decades to ruin the US economy deliberately. Where the country can not buy anything that isn't made in China while we are continuously being stopped from make anything. This has nothing to do with how great China is or how bad the US is. Its about a well planned and carried out execution. The power house of the banking, oil, and big business is not located in the US never has been. We have been killed and robbed of everything. While their mantra is NEXT.
Originally posted by Recollector
Yes, aircraft carriers CAN be obsolete and CAN be sunk by some missiles.But the point is that now, the best power projection ARE the carriers.I mean, yes, you can launch 200 planes from China to , lets say, Venezuela.
However...they will need like 3-4 refueling , not to mention they NEED authorization to fly over a number of countries.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by Recollector
Yes, aircraft carriers CAN be obsolete and CAN be sunk by some missiles.But the point is that now, the best power projection ARE the carriers.I mean, yes, you can launch 200 planes from China to , lets say, Venezuela.
However...they will need like 3-4 refueling , not to mention they NEED authorization to fly over a number of countries.
Why would China have a need to do that?
Think, if they only have to fight a defensive war against the US, they have no need projecting their power overseas with aircraft carriers. They could move their standing armies and heavy equipment across the Asian continent and still hit the US everywhere in the Mid-East without even needing naval support. Compared to what the US is pouring into fighting Afghanistan and Iraq now, how many more resources do you think it would require on top of that to fight invading Chinese too?
China is not trying to play world emperor like the US is. All they have to do is defend their home turf. Hell, they could just dump all their dollar reserves or try to cash them in and immediately crash the US economy if they really wanted.
Originally posted by Recollector
Not about defensive wars man...its power projection.think about US and their interest, most beeing economic interest overseas.As example, US can defend EU against anyone (insert NATO here) because comercial trades beteen US and EU are vital to both.US dont even need carriers, they have bases all over the world.China have squat.