China asks army to be ready for regional war

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
japan have no chance against china and they know it
but they feel secure because they have nuke

i found japan also very arrogant in this island conflict

china is running out thin of patience and it can be dangerous for japan




posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 

Right now, China is just testing American resolve to come to Japans aid. Wonder how many of those F15s were piloted by Americans?




0
edit on 14-12-2012 by intrptr because: whoops



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 

Now this, I agree with you 100% on. China has sane, logical and highly intelligent people based in reality. The United States has sane, logical and highly intelligent people based in reality. So does Russia for that matter. It would take the most freakish of circumstances or escalation by outside nations totally beyond reason to bring nuclear exchanges between the 3 BIG powers. Horrible conventional war? Perhaps.... Nuclear? No. Agreed.

Beijing and Washington would both know...at the instant they committed to doing it...launching those weapons would be as much suicide as it would be evil. I don't worry about the major powers...I worry about the small nations with less rational leaders. (Of All stripes and flavors....no one in particular)



Oh there are a number of smaller nations that might, and when I say might I really do mean possible but I would bet everything against it. Unstable leadership, and religious dogma aside, which is a key feature of most of the smaller nations, the math doesn't work for the goals. To successfully fight a war you have to have definable achievable goals.

Iran and Israel as an example, Iran doesn't want Israel to exist. Ok so you have that but you also have the fact Israel is home to many Islamic Holy sites which become worthless because of the fallout. So using a nuclear weapon to eradicate Israel would work for the first part but not the second part of putting the holy sites back under Islamic control.

North Korea and South Korea is pretty much the same thing. Sure they could do it and maybe win that fight but it ultimately goes against the goal of unifying the peninsula. The real nuclear threat is small criminal and terrorist groups getting nuclear material. And in that regard these smaller and many of the larger nations do not adequately control their nuclear material. National bluster aside no country really wants to use a nuclear weapon but they do like the increased leverage having one provides.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
It's kinda controversial but I suspect China might have the intention of imploding Japan's economy in a slow manner.

China's action is diverting Japan's attention towards the issue making it more difficult for Japan to handle its economic problems as Shinzo Abe whom most likely to be the next PM would increase military budget, something that could further strain its economy. In the meantime such tension would continue affect Japan's export to China which declined for the past few months.

In other words, China simply create an illusion of fear by upgrading its military hardware but sending surveillance boats instead of navy to maintain its "peaceful" nature. All China need to do is similar to the demise of the Soviet Union, by making Japan bankrupt. Imagine just by saying a few words and sending a harmless plane is enough for Japan to scramble eight F-15 jets which found nothing the moment they reach there, wasting time and operating cost.

However China is doing it slowly to prevent a sudden shock to their economy as they would need few years to adapt new kind of growth which do not depend much on Japan trade. Of course they can't simply say it loud but remain in a way that they are not directly responsible for Japan's crisis but secretly doing whatever it takes from rare earth restrictions to territorial disputes as long it prevents Japan's recovery.

Why you may ask? Japan is US strongest ally in the region in countering China's influence but taking down Japan means China would become the sole regional power where US would find much more difficult in pivot towards East Asia as China continue to grow stronger without much hindrance.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ben81
japan have no chance against china and they know it
but they feel secure because they have nuke

i found japan also very arrogant in this island conflict

china is running out thin of patience and it can be dangerous for japan


Ben, Japan doesn't have nuclear weapons.

Japan does have an extremely capable military ranked 9th in the world. If hostilities were to break out over the Senkaku Islands the JSDF would give the PLA a fit.

China's numerical superiority doesn't count if they cant get there and the JSDF excels at area denial.

Historically the PRC has had their backsides handed to them in the last 3 major conflicts they have endeavored ( Sino-Indian War 1962, Sino-Soviet border conflict 1969, Sino-Vietnamese War 1979 )

Japan has been in possession of the Islands for over a hundred years, previous to Japanese annexation they were uninhabited.

China only became interested in the early 1970's when oil was discovered in the area.

Do you also feel that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, The Republic of the Philippines and the Republic of Korea are arrogant in their territorial disputes with China?

The world is running out of patience with China's ambitions of empire but the solution will be found in diplomacy not war.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


KeliOnyx, I agree with your assessment.

Nice to see more ATS contributors doing their homework and posting rational, well thought out commentary.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
China is obviously expanding..it has done so for decades via china towns in almost every nation on Earth.
They have bought up vast tracts of farmland in Australia as well as mines and suburbs in major cities.
The sheer volume of their population and their vast army plus nuclear weapons ,gives them the edge.
What some fail to realise is they are ambitious for their culture to be dominant in the world at large.
Its scary times make no doubt about this.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SloAnPainful
Well it's about to get messy. We are on the brink of it people and by "it" I mean WWIII.

I don't normally post things in regard to the whole WWIII stuff, but it's everywhere now. Gov'ts are pushing and pushing, it's only a matter of time until someone pushes back, and hard.

ETA; It starts with regional and just escalates. That's my two cents though.

-SAP-
edit on 13-12-2012 by SloAnPainful because: (no reason given)


Yes I feel the same way as you, we are closer to WW3 today than we were on the 1st of December, and the UK public are not going to be protected when war comes soon.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   
It's funny how when topics like this come up, you inevitably hear a handful or two of people making comments such as "This is the start of WWIII, for SURE!"

(You even got some of this with the secessionist talk-- "oh, there's going to be a revolution," "we should start a revolution," "when the revolution starts..." etc)

It's to the point you almost have to wonder if some people are, for some reason, getting paid to post things like this. Stir up a frenzy, strike fear, or help "guide" public opinion. But of course that could be seen as a paranoid thought. Who would ever have a vested interest in stirring things up, or swaying public opinion regarding war? And why? Interesting questions to ponder, regardless, IMO.



That said, I think most of us really would not want to see this escalate. China is one of the few potential "enemies" I would be concerned with. Not just because of their massive size (and do they have nukes?) but also because of their allied relationship with North Korea-- a country which not only has been brainwashed to completely hate us, but which also has one of the largest armies on the planet. Sure, maybe they're supposedly piss poor.... but in a large conflict, I'm sure China wouldn't mind dumping some cash into their war machine.

And don't get me wrong-- I do understand how this kind of thing, if escalated, could turn into something much bigger than it presently is. But I think to say-- "Oh no, guys, here comes the BIG ONE!" is a little premature.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I don't think China is interested in war, not just yet anyway. They planned long term and this tough talk from the top guy is just tough talk to test their people's resolve and nationalism, since he is still new in his job, this will strengths his consolidation of power.

Japan on the other hand is still very capable in defending themselves but their problem is they have never been repentance from their atrocities and this doesn't bode well with all the other nations on their receiving ends. Their school system were never taught in this subject and for them to flash their victim's card and then religiously tending to the Yasukuni Shrine. I really would like to see what our reactions would be if a Hitler's Church is built in Berlin to commemorate all those dead Nazis.

Until they atoned, Japan won't live in a friendly times and USA can only just protects her so much and basing on what USA is going through now, it won't be that long.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
If something does kick off over there between Japan and China, I hope that our leaders in the west have the good sense to stay the hell out of it. They don't.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by iwilliam
It's funny how when topics like this come up, you inevitably hear a handful or two of people making comments such as "This is the start of WWIII, for SURE!"

(You even got some of this with the secessionist talk-- "oh, there's going to be a revolution," "we should start a revolution," "when the revolution starts..." etc)


Good observation.

Disregarding the usual uneducated hyperbole and speculation, we are currently living in the most peaceful times mankind has ever known.


It seems as if violence is everywhere, but it's really on the run.

Yes, thousands of people have died in bloody unrest from Africa to Pakistan, while terrorists plot bombings and kidnappings. Wars drag on in Iraq and Afghanistan. In peaceful Norway, a man massacred 69 youths in July. In Mexico, headless bodies turn up, victims of drug cartels. This month eight people died in a shooting in a California hair salon.

Yet, historically, we've never had it this peaceful.

That's the thesis of three new books, including one by prominent Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker. Statistics reveal dramatic reductions in war deaths, family violence, racism, rape, murder and all sorts of mayhem.

In his book, Pinker writes: "The decline of violence may be the most significant and least appreciated development in the history of our species."

And it runs counter to what the mass media is reporting and essentially what we feel in our guts.

Pinker and other experts say the reality is not painted in bloody anecdotes, but demonstrated in the black and white of spreadsheets and historical documents. They tell a story of a world moving away from violence.



_ The number of people killed in battle – calculated per 100,000 population – has dropped by 1,000-fold over the centuries as civilizations evolved. Before there were organized countries, battles killed on average more than 500 out of every 100,000 people. In 19th century France, it was 70. In the 20th century with two world wars and a few genocides, it was 60. Now battlefield deaths are down to three-tenths of a person per 100,000.


_ The rate of genocide deaths per world population was 1,400 times higher in 1942 than in 2008.

_ There were fewer than 20 democracies in 1946. Now there are close to 100. Meanwhile, the number of authoritarian countries has dropped from a high of almost 90 in 1976 to about 25 now.



Murder in European countries has steadily fallen from near 100 per 100,000 people in the 14th and 15th centuries to about 1 per 100,000 people now.

_ Murder within families. The U.S. rate of husbands being killed by their wives has dropped from 1.2 per 100,000 in 1976 to just 0.2. For wives killed by their husbands, the rate has slipped from 1.4 to 0.8 over the same time period.

_ Rape in the United States is down 80 percent since 1973. Lynchings, which used to occur at a rate of 150 a year, have disappeared.

_ Discrimination against blacks and gays is down, as is capital punishment, the spanking of children, and child abuse.

But if numbers are too inaccessible, Pinker is more than happy to provide the gory stories illustrating our past violence. "It is easy to forget how dangerous life used to be, how deeply brutality was once woven into the fabric of daily existence," Pinker writes in his book.

World Becoming Less Violent: Despite Global Conflict, Statistics Show Violence In Steady Decline


Originally posted by iwilliam
It's to the point you almost have to wonder if some people are, for some reason, getting paid to post things like this. Stir up a frenzy, strike fear, or help "guide" public opinion. But of course that could be seen as a paranoid thought. Who would ever have a vested interest in stirring things up, or swaying public opinion regarding war? And why? Interesting questions to ponder, regardless, IMO.


I believe its nothing more than basic human psychology. Everyone always wants to believe that they are somehow special and therefore must be living in exceptional times. The truth is we are living in extraordinary times but for exactly the opposite reasons some choose to believe.

IMHO, there is nothing more nefarious to what is happening than a combination of ignorance mixed with instantaneous global communication. People tend to be lazy and take information that reinforces what they want to believe rather than doing the research for themselves.


Originally posted by iwilliam
That said, I think most of us really would not want to see this escalate. China is one of the few potential "enemies" I would be concerned with. Not just because of their massive size (and do they have nukes?) but also because of their allied relationship with North Korea-- a country which not only has been brainwashed to completely hate us, but which also has one of the largest armies on the planet. Sure, maybe they're supposedly piss poor.... but in a large conflict, I'm sure China wouldn't mind dumping some cash into their war machine.


Yes, China has a nuclear weapons capability but just how many and what type is a topic of substantial debate.

Most estimates are a couple of hundred warheads.

The PRC have a lot more to lose and absolutely nothing to gain from any economic instability on the Korean peninsula, much less an open war between the DPRK and the West. As China's role as a true economic superpower continues to evolve, the DPRK has become a tremendous diplomatic liability for the PRC.

IMHO, the PRC only continue to tolerate North Korea because the alternative is a flood of war refugees ending with a reunified Korea governed by a U.S. allied democracy on their border


Originally posted by iwilliam
And don't get me wrong-- I do understand how this kind of thing, if escalated, could turn into something much bigger than it presently is. But I think to say-- "Oh no, guys, here comes the BIG ONE!" is a little premature.


Agreed.



edit on 14-12-2012 by Drunkenparrot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
China would be fairly easy to defeat. Their navy is weak, and their Air Force is weak. People also forget about our strategic bombing force that can drop hundreds of pre designated bombs per freight.
edit on 14-12-2012 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


Errrrr. k, but you will be fighting off the coast of china, and you have no way of knowing if they are weak. There has been no Chinese action in recent years for anyone outside the red giant to even know their exact capabilities.

Chinese Active personnel approximately 2,285,000

Fit for
military service 318,265,016 males, age 16–49
300,323,611 females, age 16–49

US Military
Active personnel 1,456,862
Fit for
military service 60,620,143 males, age 18–49 (2010 est.),
59,401,941 females, age 18–49 (2010 est.)

You're outnumbered, big time. Weak military my ass and you also seem to forget EVERYTHING YOU OWN IS BUILT THERE !!!

You're lead to believe they are weak. I am not implying the US doesn't have a strong military, because you do. How ever, that doesn't mean you are the strongest, or best. You have not squared off with a modern nation in a very long time. The only experience the Americans have with the Chinese was during Vietnam, and it didn't turn out how you thought it would either. The North supported by China, took America by an enormous surprise when you underestimated them. War is a terrible thing, you can have the best toys, the most money, and get beat by a camel farmer with a stolen 155 shell. It happens every day in the middle east.

The greatest weakness in any conflict is underestimating your enemy.

China's fit for service males outnumber the US population.
US population estimates for 2012 311,591,917

Chinese males fit for service 318,265,016, age 16–49
Not to mention the 300,323,611 females, age 16–49 fit for service.

edit on 14-12-2012 by Hijinx because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
This gets me worried. first because there is oil in the islands, the chinese and the US are craving for oil specially china as one of the ATS member said. second because the US is an ally of japan, japan has no military, the US and china are political and military superpowers CRAVING FOR OIL. if china attacks japan the US will step in not only because of the ally but for the oil. eventhough the thing is just regional it will in a matter of days be international thus getting more countries involved and starting a WW. it like what happened on the 1940s and 50s during WW II. it all started as a dispute between germany and france for some little territory and then BANG! the world is in chaos. also as thechnology is today im afraid we are at the brink of something really bad. govs are just looking for excuses to start a conflict.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 

remember that when WWII started there was a time of peace, yes maybe local unrest in countries due to their own problems, but in peace, and the same for the times before WWI. there is calm before the storm and there is calm after the storm before another one comes. eventhough it may seem not really possible at these times remember that we dont know everything that happens on the higher seats and we are blind and deaf to most of what they say and do.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by iwilliam
It's funny how when topics like this come up, you inevitably hear a handful or two of people making comments such as "This is the start of WWIII, for SURE!"

(You even got some of this with the secessionist talk-- "oh, there's going to be a revolution," "we should start a revolution," "when the revolution starts..." etc)

It's to the point you almost have to wonder if some people are, for some reason, getting paid to post things like this. Stir up a frenzy, strike fear, or help "guide" public opinion. But of course that could be seen as a paranoid thought. Who would ever have a vested interest in stirring things up, or swaying public opinion regarding war? And why? Interesting questions to ponder, regardless, IMO.

That said, I think most of us really would not want to see this escalate. China is one of the few potential "enemies" I would be concerned with. Not just because of their massive size (and do they have nukes?) but also because of their allied relationship with North Korea-- a country which not only has been brainwashed to completely hate us, but which also has one of the largest armies on the planet. Sure, maybe they're supposedly piss poor.... but in a large conflict, I'm sure China wouldn't mind dumping some cash into their war machine.

And don't get me wrong-- I do understand how this kind of thing, if escalated, could turn into something much bigger than it presently is. But I think to say-- "Oh no, guys, here comes the BIG ONE!" is a little premature.

I'm not sure why as even on other sites like Japan Today where people seems anxious and excited to see a war between China and Japan. It is completely outdated ideology for both nations as it would affect the economic structure of the entire world due to second and third largest economy. China refrain itself from sending military ships and planes for the past few decades while Japan on the other hand deployed eight fighter jets to the disputed area just to intercept one surveillance plane.

I'm not sure if Japan is thinking straight with existence of restoration party and such but China recently has known for its economic warfare which started 2 years ago against Japan and it worked pretty well. The best way for China is simply destroying Japan's economy slowly and indeed we are looking at it now as Japan is entering a recession and a more right party is going to be elected which would not benefit its economy but military where China just need to maintain enough tension so Japan either have to give in or risk an economic crisis.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ben81
japan have no chance against china and they know it
but they feel secure because they have nuke

i found japan also very arrogant in this island conflict

china is running out thin of patience and it can be dangerous for japan


China only picks on weaker nations. US would support Japan. China would destroyed in a matter of weeks and the new China carrier sunk almost instantly. China only started caring about the islands once it was known they were worth something, Japan has been in control of them for a very long time, and they were privately owned by a Japanese national.

Anyone who thinks this will escalate into war is delusional. China would be like an ant under the heel of a giant boot that is the American forces.

ETA: A link that shows how rediculous China's demands are.
newsimg.bbc.co.uk...
edit on 15-12-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by neobios
even on other sites like Japan Today where people seems anxious and excited to see a war between China and Japan.


Don't put too much stock in that site for anything more than the headlines - most of the core posters are in Korea, activists for various causes (anti-whaling), or fresh off the boat English teachers. No one Japanese actually reads that site. It's not exactly representative of Japanese opinion.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Time to let Japan start seriously arming itself, but in the case of China attacking Japan - yes the States would get involved, hell - you might as well say World War 3 just started.


It would last several weeks, all US debt would be forgiven, and China would be in shambles. Not really WW3.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hijinx


You're lead to believe they are weak. I am not implying the US doesn't have a strong military, because you do. How ever, that doesn't mean you are the strongest, or best. You have not squared off with a modern nation in a very long time. The only experience the Americans have with the Chinese was during Vietnam, and it didn't turn out how you thought it would either. The North supported by China, took America by an enormous surprise when you underestimated them. War is a terrible thing, you can have the best toys, the most money, and get beat by a camel farmer with a stolen 155 shell. It happens every day in the middle east.

The greatest weakness in any conflict is underestimating your enemy.



I believe it was Mark Twain who said "Get your facts straight first, then you can distort them as you like"


You are confusing Vietnam with Korea.


The Korean War: The Chinese Intervention





new topics
top topics
active topics
 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join