It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
Stealthspy is selling the Chinese short, no doubt about it. The Chinese airforce could pose a real problem just by sheer weight of numbers, but not early in the war, because of the places where the two countries have their airforces and logistics placed.
In Tibet specifically, India has a strong logistical advantage with a shorter and less mountainous supply line.
I am not aware of the strength of India's air defenses, however I believe that Indian surface to air missiles would play a crucial role in creating a workable tactical situation in the air.
India could possibly have it's way (depending on the objective), but this could be one of those wars where the first one to make a mistake loses it all.
Also, India can not afford to bet on Pakistan staying put. Pakistan very well might not stay put, because an expansionist India would be a frightening prospect. If they felt they were next, they would be wise to strike first and fight the war on their own terms.
Originally posted by Russian
Stealth Spy no India will not be able to take on Chinese Navy. China has the Semernovy Class DDGs that are built to take care of aircraft carriers. Also India has a smaller airforce with less upgraded aircrafts. It does matter if you are trained well. Large numbers have an edge. Also China has 400 Su-30MKKs and they have Su-27s. I can bet that they train their pilots very good on their new aircrafts. They will not just through in a newbie into their best aircraft. Over all China is not weaker then India. It might even have an edge over India.
"China doesn't want to accept US leadership. Confrontation is inevitable."
At present China can't compete militarily with the US. But it's important to remember that American military might is built on the superiority of the US economy. The day when China has more money than anyone, it'll have a better defence than anyone
Heya guys, I hope some of ya still remember me. Kinda left the forum when this whole thread turned into a holocaust. Only came back a few weeks ago. Seems like we can have more serious discussion nowadays. I feel kinda lonely, though, me being the sole commie drone left *sniff*
Anyway, several points to make. That "Crouching Tiger Soaring Dragon" article made me laugh my ass off. I can't believe an Indian could write that on a healthy stomach. Shanghai isn't insanely well-developed because China is, but rather because the Chinese economy is highly centralized. If you moved the local governments of Mumbai, Bangalore, New Delhi, and maybe Calcutta into a single port city, you'll get something resembling what Shanghai is (adjusted for GDP and human development index, but still about the same). Either that or they'll bicker like monkeys on acid and burn it to the ground. Anyway, Shanghai is overdeveloped compared to the rest of Chinese cities (which is why we have a real-estate bubble there). While I cannot claim to have ever been a resident, I did live there for a month in '98 and another month in '03. What a difference 5 years made.... Pudong, especially. Actually this kind of centralized overgrowth is common in East Asia. If any of you ever get a chance to go to, say, Japan, go check out Osaka first before seeing Tokyo. Both are highly-developed major cities, but there is no denying that Osaka feels like a poor cousin compared to Tokyo (but don't say that to Osakans, they'll lynch you on the spot). Same thing with Seoul. No other major Korean city is as cosmopolitan (not to mention huge) as Seoul. Even Indonesia's Jakarta feels like that in comparison to any other Indonesian city. Bottomline is, go anywhere in East Asia and there's bound to be this gigantic, monstrous, overdeveloped city sitting in the middle of what look like midget cousins in comparison.
One other thing, Shanghai ain't the New York of anything. As arrogantly bourgeoise as Shanghainese are (can you tell I don't like them?) they're still significantly friendlier than the typical New Yorker. Plus most of Shanghai still feels (as ironic as that may sound) less cramped than New York is.
That doesn't mean the rest of the Chinese cities are underdeveloped, mind you. Point is, the glittering Chinese city landscapes are quite real, not PS as some here have suggested in the past. I toured some of 'em last July and yep, they're there, just where the pictures show 'em. Check it out yourselves if you have a chance. Maybe a forum member can be appointed official "BR spy" and sent on paypal-pooled money to check out some cities. Great cities though, tall skyscrapers, mostly new. What is often unmentioned is that, excepting Shanghai, these are examples of our "headstart infrastructure development". Build 'em, then wait for 'em to be occupied. Of course, most of those shots posted here in the past were taken back in '01 -'03, and most have gained occupancy by now. An American colleague speculated that China might already have more large skyscrapered cities than the US. At first I laughed at the suggestion, but then I recalled that construction costs in China are significantly lower than in the US, with significantly higher investment going into infrastructure, and I began to wonder.
And then I began to worry. I can see now why it's necessary to cool down the economy FAST! With an economy half the size of the US', what economic justification can we produce for having more huge skyscrapers than the US? Professional analysis aside, a man on the streets can easily see that we are entering a period of irrational growth fueled by overoptimism just by walking through these cities. I found out from a relative living in Guangzhou that he recently rented a posh office in a new building for a small textile conglomerate he had only just started. He hadn't even started production yet, and he already got himself this expensive office. We talked about his plans and he said he was preparing for the end of textile quotas. He used that as justification for the "explosive growth" he was expecting by next year. I pointed out that thousands of other entrepreneurs like him were banking on the exact same bet. That was when I found out the reason for the posh office: It makes his company look established and professional. Face! It was all face! That was his plan of attack, make himself look cool so potential customers would be dazzled enough to place orders. The scary thing is, it might even work... probably already had, even, given how the apparel industry operates. The scarier thing is that I bet he wasn't the only one with this idea. China is a huge country. I can easily imagine a thousand entrepreneurs renting posh offices in newly-built skyscrapers betting on appearances to land them contracts.
What it felt like was the go-go period of the late '90s Silicon Valley.
Just before the Dot Bomb.
Yeah, there's definitely a bubble in China.
On the other hand, Mr. Liao the textile magnate is probably a good example, brash as he is, of why that bubble popping would not mean a halt on China's growth. You see, if there is one great quality he has, it is resilience. His last business, the one he used to obtain capital for this one, was making pirated golfing equipment in a suburb of Shenzhen. Until the authorities steamrolled that business out of existence, that is. He still complains about favoritism in that debacle, but seems as unrepentant (and faux-cosmopolitan) as ever. The greatest strength of China today lies not with the big-time financiers of Hong Kong, or the magnates of Taiwan, or even the giant MNCs kowtowing to Beijing. If anything, our greatest strength lies with ambitious, unbreakable, opportunistic robber barons like my relative in Guangzhou. Regulations and politics be damned! Give 'em a niche, they'll fill it like quicksilver.
BTW, is it just me or is the Indian media spouting off the "Chinese consensus" from every orifice nowadays? Everywhere I look Indian commentators and economists are touting reforms that strongly resemble Deng's in '78. If anything, I think every country has its own identity, and borrowing from China would not help India in this case. For one thing, how would you enforce? Having been born in Shenzhen, I know the gov't took some pretty draconian measures to make sure Deng's reforms were followed. Most of those weren't pretty, and I seriously doubt Indians would stomach that. Another thing to consider is the relative collectivist tendency of us Chinese. It was easier for victims of those reforms to survive in China by relying on familial networks. This is because for every ten Liaos living in the (relatively untouched) countryside there would be one or two living in the (very much touched) cities to lend a helping hand. When Deng's reforms initially gave advantage to the country, some of us went back there to get work. When the opposite happened, we went back to the cities for same. Is there any social network of this kind in India?
One last thing: Congratulations on the UNSC bid, though I admit I wish we hadn't been quite so cynical as this. Ah, well, politics is politics, guys. I always knew China would have relented in India's case (though not in Japan's), but this coupling the issue to the Dalai Lama bit is bloody stupid and feels like a last-ditch political concession to some hardliners in Beijing. It makes the whole deal inconsistent and seem like an afterthought.
IF it happened, Pakistan is so likely to jump in because of the perception that they are next. By this logic, only nations which were afraid that the victor would turn on them are likely to get involved.
I will provide a worst case scenario which starts with the most likely events and degenerates into what would probably be called wild fantasy. Before anyone blasts me too hard, just remember that a single assassination in the midst of the proper international environment started both world wars (they were really a single war after all- the 1920s were just half-time.) Please note that I haven't spent a lot of time on this, so I'm open to corrections if I've missed anything in this little breakdown. I'm just playing "predict the end of the world" because i was asked to and its fun.
If America were providing logistical support to India they would be inclined to move forces into the area to deter Chinese retaliation- This seems almost a given if such a war happened.
This opens the door for a 3rd party mistake: If North Korea mistakenly believed that there was about to be an all-out war between American and China, then they might cross the 38th to pre-empt expected American aggression. -This is somwhat possible, but not likely at all.
Most likely- China will not support North Korea. North Korea will have to use nukes against American and South Korean forces. America will nuke North Korea back. China will declare North Korea a protectorate, promise no further aggression from N. Korea, and threaten retaliation against any further US attacks.
Less likely- China supports N. Korea and starts WWIII.
Your argument's fundamental flaw is that since US controls the world economy, therefore China has no chance whatsoever. If your premise is correct, why do you think that India will have a better chance? You think Americans are naturally more friendly towards india than China?
Originally posted by Hawkssss
The only reason they haven't called you "enemy" or "competitive partner" is because india is not strong enough to pose a threat to the US (India only acquired nuke capability recently and still doesn't have the ability to hit continental US).
[edit on 25-10-2004 by Hawkssss]
Originally posted by The Astral City
If India decided to move and invade Tibet the rest of the world would sit back and watch, no way in hell the US, Russia or the EU is going to step between Indian and China.
1: India lacks heavy support and airlift aircraft in large numbers, they would probably need overland routes for large troop movements
2: Weather is horribly unpredictable in that area, helicopter supply lines would be very shaky at best.
This would probably go on for a week or two before China really noticed the bee stinging its backside and responded like nothing the world has seen since World War Two. China will respond with massively overwhelming force, they would throw as many troops, planes, tanks and support at the Indian army as they could pack onto their rail lines and highways.
The inital Chinese attack would be postitively overwhelming. I would theorize that the Chinese would remember the first engagements against the US in Korea, and use a large combine arms strike to slam the Indian groundlines with MOAB-style weapons while blasting the Indian navy into pecies and reclaiming theater-wide air superiority in one strike. Then the Chinese ground troops and tank units would ram into strategic points along the Indian lines, supported by ground attack aircraft and heavy bombardment.