posted on Feb, 16 2013 @ 09:32 PM
there are a few themes running thru this thread that i wish to tease out a bit.
Splitinfinity does not error in his fact based assesment of status quo forces, and a linear approach to conflict (as defined by the US) would
undoubtedly be checkmated very early, the US military is designed to play the big game, global war, name a theatre, they will kick your arse, make no
mistake. The marines could take Beijing if it came down to it, holding it, another matter, but if the road to Bahgdad was the longest drive by in
history, then the short jaunt to Beijing would be met with many surprised looking chineese. Real war is about the element of surprise, refer: nazi
retreat from stalingrad. (nazi had tactical surprise, soviets, strategic surprise)
~could the chineese give the yanks a tactical surprise?, perhaps. history is littered with dien bien phus, the "too big to fails". strategicly, it
would be america to trump, thats obvious by the whole paradigm of reality we live in. in fact its so self evident im aghast at the many speculations
to the contrary, have these people even seen a CVBG? sure, area denial strategy, assymetric warfare, war of the flea Mao calls it. chinas plans are
based on known US ability, conventional, espionage aside, just the visable power of the fleets trumps everything. its america who can make noise in
the east, attack in the west, thousands of years of chineese martial history teaches them they face an unwinable battle. they are not stupid, despite
so how does one win an unwinable battle? firstly, by not to fight it. the battle must be faught where the enemy is weakest. if you have not read art
of war, which incidently takes all of fourty minutes including commentary, then it would be a good place to start.
which leads me to penninjas superlative post, that i would post in its entirety if i knew how to lol (consider it quoted) winning the unwinnable war.
The Peoples War. an interesting, constantly evolving strategy, a formless plan. an abandonment of tactics in favor of strategic plan. people ought to
consider its implications, allies currently have a possibility of becoming neutralised through demography.
I live in NZ, our country embraces both immigration and investment from china, and we are changing because of it, i dont personally have a stake in
it, the shifting money/power balance therfore i remain neutral to the change. but it is change. what loyaltys these people have in a generation
remains to be seen, but one thing is for sure, Americas Asian pivot is late, and may prove ineffectual to a containment of the chineese century.
the peoples war takes into account superior enemy fire power. China is looking to shift the battle. china plays the money game better than america.
america likes to attach pesky conditions like basic human rights, china has no such qualms, none. it acts without a social conscience.
ultimately we are up against an ethnicity, currently dominated by a one party state. china was never a foe, it isnt currently, but it is a competitor,
possibly with the potential to beat the west at its own game, (you never started the empire america, you inherited it) America can not win a fight if
battle can not be joined, this is evident in your previous asian forrays, and it will hold true. no battle = no win. one thing any student of chineese
history notices quickly is the way various emporers are revered for the population growth they achieve. a very chineese thing.
may i recommend to anyone interested in chineese history up to recent past, the podcast, china history podcast, by lazlo montgomery, an american
sinophile, fluent and perhaps the most accesable entrance to chineese history, as the roman saying goes: it is right to learn from your enemy
chinas approach to the senkakus is the same as taiwan, tibet, kashmir and a myriad of other peripheral territories. they are barometers, chineese
history confirms that as chinas power grows, all the countries will kowtow, with china at a zenith, even mighty Japan will acknowledge all under
heaven, lol, well thats what they think. it is historically accurate, great thing with history, its always rhyming.