China for World super power in next 40 years

Originally posted by plutonian
[Sunburn is a frontier showcase, I am sure the Chinese got some surprises hiding in the back, the Chinese government are good at hiding things off the media.

*clap* *clap* *clap*

Blobber says:

"Well, imperfections lead to the Asian economic crisis in the end of the 90's. So yes I think they have seen that somewhere -in the growth of their economy- to counter imperfections they must have democratic reforms."

But they heven't had any yet. That is my point.

"In fact some Chinese leaders already stated they believe in the future there will be a hegemony of one doctrine in this world. I believe when he said that he meant democracy..."

I don't, because I see no evidence for it.

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Blobber says:

"Well, imperfections lead to the Asian economic crisis in the end of the 90's. So yes I think they have seen that somewhere -in the growth of their economy- to counter imperfections they must have democratic reforms."

But they heven't had any yet. That is my point.

"In fact some Chinese leaders already stated they believe in the future there will be a hegemony of one doctrine in this world. I believe when he said that he meant democracy..."

I don't, because I see no evidence for it.

I will try to give you the report or article tomorrow, if I am not wrong within the context he could only mean democracy/capitalism, or he even said it explicitly. Anyway, I will try to dig it up and give you the link.

Blobber

To those who are tired of reading these commie drones repeatedly trying to perpetuate their superiority, I say, you ought to read this blog on the Chinese Psyche.

Chinese Psyche

very interesting indeed.

Soon the attention of the people shifted to our corner where a very intense discussion was going on. A senior Chinese research fellow was trying to convince us on how China would be the de-facto super power within the next 8 years. His theory was being countered by a Japanese researcher who believed that within the next few years the world would be multipolar and not unipolar. There were 3 more people in this discussion sharing their views on the topic and one of them was me while the other was a British and a Russian researcher. Most of us seem to agree with the Japanese perspective than the Chinese one. Japan and China endure a love-hate relationship just like India and Pakistan. The Chinese are still paranoid of the occupation of China by the Japanese during the world war. The hatred is so deep that it surfaces easily whenever a Chinese and Japanese come face to face.

Another non-CCP BS website would be International Herald Tribune.

This editorial highlights the merits of both India and China's growth patterns. It verdicts by the year 2015, where both can win. Now shouldn't that make all of us happy? Surely not the chicoms though.

www.iht.com...

Originally posted by Blobber

Originally posted by plutonian
[Sunburn is a frontier showcase, I am sure the Chinese got some surprises hiding in the back, the Chinese government are good at hiding things off the media.

*clap* *clap* *clap*

Yea, like this one...

Factory worker who helped to organize a strike during China's 1989 pro-democracy protests has been released after nearly 15 years in prison. God knows how many more souls are still languishing in jails even now, where's the international outrage?

www.newsday.com...

*clap* *clap* *shut* *your* *clap* *trap*

How do you police human rights in a totalitarian country with the largest population on Earth?

I can't see an answer for that one.

NSA

Originally posted by aryaputhra
Another non-CCP BS website would be International Herald Tribune.

This editorial highlights the merits of both India and China's growth patterns. It verdicts by the year 2015, where both can win. Now shouldn't that make all of us happy?

Surely not the chicoms though.

www.iht.com...

Oh well I am a communist drone because I stated the facts. The bloomberg article goes from the assumption that China still has imperfections (corruption, ineffcicient government influence etc) 15 years from now, thus no reforms -I read it quite fast.

Here some predictions 40 years from now:
Goldman Sachs: www.reportonmoney.com...

But so what, then we have India and China being the superpowers.

Blobber

Originally posted by aryaputhra

Originally posted by Blobber

Originally posted by plutonian
[Sunburn is a frontier showcase, I am sure the Chinese got some surprises hiding in the back, the Chinese government are good at hiding things off the media.

*clap* *clap* *clap*

Yea, like this one...

Factory worker who helped to organize a strike during China's 1989 pro-democracy protests has been released after nearly 15 years in prison. God knows how many more souls are still languishing in jails even now, where's the international outrage?

www.newsday.com...

*clap* *clap* *shut* *your* *clap* *trap*

Wow such a temper, what does this have to with the topic? Plutionian was right when he mentioned that, simply because the Chinese doctrine has for decades been to show their frontier showcase, but always hide their "best" weapons.

If you want to talk about human rights, how about the Indians mutilating their wifes?

Oh I am Dutch by the way, not even Chinese. Please stay on topic. But reading your nick -are you Indian or Indonesian?

Blobber


[edit on 21-11-2004 by Blobber]

Originally posted by Blobber

Originally posted by Broadsword2004
Okay, from my understanding, the U.S. NEVER sent any seven carrier battle groups near China as some show of military force; that was some rumor made up that spread all over the internet and got everyone tricked cuz everyone fell for it. But the U.S. never did that, from what I read (not saying that what I read it totally right, but that is what I read; now I wish I could find WHAT it was I read to provide a link).

I will not argue further because it seems for America you make great assumptions: e.g. America can maintain her technological supremacy almost indefinately, yet for China you make the assumptions as if China in 40 years cannot be the biggest economy -while economists have calculated that they will be the biggest- because of...

Anyway, regarding Summer Pulse '4, I have never stated that the US put 7 carriergroups near China (read my post), but this exercise was unprecedented. Some analysts claim this is a direct signal to China, "we know you have a doctrine to cripple 2 of our carriergroups, now look how many we can put on sea."

Just read the quote I have given you in my earlier post, or read the links.

Edit:

Originally posted by Broadsword2004
I wouldn't use Japan versus China as an example really of warfare cuz the Chinese really had no military at the time to face the Japanese. It wasn't like Japan was some powerful military or very formerly powerful military that was going up against the more powerful Japanese military; the Chinese military had been obselete in the 1800s, and before then even I believe. Also, at that time, no one, not the United States, Japan, or anyone had too much experience operating battle ships and carriers and submarines except for WWI. Japan by then had already been modernizing its forces and there wasn't a huge technology gap to catch up on.

I wrote Japan versus Russia by the way, the west was shocked that an Asian nation could defeat a western one - they assumed back then it was impossible. Japan defeated Russia, while Japan didn't have any modern warfare experiences back then. I used this example because you assume that China doesn't have war experiences (with carriers).


Blobber


[edit on 21-11-2004 by Blobber]

[edit on 21-11-2004 by Blobber]

Well it seems you didn't fully read what I read either. By the way, Russia OR China, it doesn't matter, both were in the stone age military-wise early-on (though Russia got some good tanks going and such a little later).

I never said China will not become a powerful economy. I said, and this IS fact, that you cannot go on "predictions" made by economic "experts" as to how the country's economy will be in the future. History has shown that that sort of thing doesn't work.

And, you want to tell me how a country that yet has to make a military budget equal to that of the U.S., can catch up to the U.S. technologically in 40 years or so?? First they have to get their economy going; then they have to start doing military research and development, which they still don't quite do; they buy half their military stuff from foreign companies, meaning they themselves can't manufacture half the technology they use. Then they also have to get a military budget that equals that of the U.S.'s. Unless the U.S. drops its military budget severely any time soon, which I severely doubt will happen due to the U.S.'s role in global affairs, China cannot catch up to the U.S. militarily.

Well, the loser indians call every chinese a commie drone simply because we kick their ass in everything and they simply can't hide their jealousy.. I wonder why no one is talking about india becoming a super power... lol

Originally posted by plutonian

Originally posted by Broadsword2004

Okay, yeah, I see your point there, however I wouldn't say the computing capacity it "overwhelmed." The F-14 Tomcat had a targeting system that could simultaneously track 14 different targets at once, and lock on to all of them, and that is old technology. Modern carriers are pretty well equipped. Remember, the U.S. Navy is pretty good at hiding things too as well. You think they don't have some tricks up their sleeves as well??

Also, the U.S. has nuke subs as well, remember.

Also, I wouldn't put all this faith in the Sunburn missile. As I just said, U.S. Navy has some tricks too and I don't think they don't have a counter to the Sunburn as much as people think.

Remember, the arms industry holds some real power in this country of America, so they can get politicians to say stuff about the U.S. "not having this or that" so that they can get a contract for some billions of dollars to build the thing.

"You wouldn't say"? Is that skeptical or what, prove me wrong with figures, not assumptions.

Yeah, maybe the 200 tomcats of yours are targeting the same 14 closest targets. Their limited radar need guidance from carrier command center and awacs, that coordinated calculating power is not on the aircraft. Is that a difficult concept or you just ignored it?

The U.S. has boats with missiles on them too that it can launch at the Chinese. And I don't get your point here. No boats would ever come that close to any U.S. carrier group. They would be taken out by submarine, or aircraft, if they were that much a threat.

Also, I wasn't referring to individual F-14s up in the air, what I mean is an F-14's old-tech radar could track that much, imagine what the newer tech radars that are like two or three generations newer can do.

And that stuff about the military lobbying is pretty real; read up on it.

nation.ittefaq.com...

Can China restrain itself
By Funabashi Yoichi
Nov 21, 2004, 11:33


Henry Kissinger has made an interesting point in this connection. The United States has land borders with just two countries, Canada and Mexico, neither of which poses it any military challenge. This has made it easy for it to project its power globally to a degree unmatched by any other country. China, by contrast, borders on 14 countries, including three nuclear powers: Russia, India, and Pakistan. This places geopolitical constraints on its rise. Power projection by China is likely to run into much stronger resistance than that by the United States.



[edit on 21-11-2004 by aryaputhra]

Allright guys, lets lay off the big quotes shall we. Ive dished out enough quote warning for one night and just in this thread alone. If the big quotes continue, other negative reinforcement may be required

Thanks
FredT

Edit: for those of saying "what big quotes" please take a look here on the guidelines:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 11/21/04 by FredT]

By the way, I love that Joe Cool Snoopy pic you have

[Oh I am Dutch by the way, not even Chinese. Please stay on topic. But reading your nick -are you Indian or Indonesian?

[edit on 21-11-2004 by Blobber]

Dutch? Oh so that explains it

Ja, ek is van indie af. Ek kan praat jou taal 'n bietjie. Duitse en nederlandse mense is baie mooilik. Maar hoekom jy is soos? Onthou, weet jy, ek is 'n bietjie rascist. Ek ken nie die 'chinese' volkeren nie. Ek hoop jy verstaan wat ek se?

By the way, I love that Joe Cool Snoopy pic you have

yeah..cool suck up... i mean shnoopy pic.

[edit on 21-11-2004 by aryaputhra]

Originally posted by Broadsword2004
Well it seems you didn't fully read what I read either. By the way, Russia OR China, it doesn't matter, both were in the stone age military-wise early-on (though Russia got some good tanks going and such a little later).

*sigh* (I know I have stated I will not argue anymore, but alas)
You assumed that if a country doesn't have military experiences, that that country can not fight well. The war in 1904-1905 between Russia and Japan shows how false your assumption is. Yes, they both had modern equipment for that time frame, and Japan beat Russia while it's the first time (after the Samurai era) that Japan conducted modern warfare, so it does matter. It shows your assumption is wrong.

Originally posted by Broadsword2004 never said China will not become a powerful economy. I said, and this IS fact, that you cannot go on "predictions" made by economic "experts" as to how the country's economy will be in the future. History has shown that that sort of thing doesn't work.

Yet you assume out of nowhere that the US can maintain her "technological supremacy", while several economic models have predicted that China will be the biggest economy on this world in 40 years.

Originally posted by Broadsword2004 and, you want to tell me how a country that yet has to make a military budget equal to that of the U.S., can catch up to the U.S. technologically in 40 years or so?? First they have to get their economy going; then they have to start doing military research and development, which they still don't quite do; they buy half their military stuff from foreign companies, meaning they themselves can't manufacture half the technology they use. Then they also have to get a military budget that equals that of the U.S.'s. Unless the U.S. drops its military budget severely any time soon, which I severely doubt will happen due to the U.S.'s role in global affairs, China cannot catch up to the U.S. militarily.

It's very simple, if an economy has bigger output, that economy can catch up much faster in production. May I also remind you that China's gap in the military is not because primarily that they don't have the knowledge, but mainly because they don't have the economic infrastructure. So in essence when they have reformed their economy (takes probably more than 40 years) they have an output -ceteris paribus- 4-5 times of the US, R&D 4-5 times larger etc. In fact it is this economies of scale that has also caused the creation of the European Union. Even now, China is not 40 years behind (in knowledge), they are not 40 years behind in military (they are modernizing their forces), and the US has a debt of 700 billion US $ to the Chinese.

A side note regarding India (more directed to aryaputhra), the forreign investments in China is much higher than India (approx 10x). Oh I just read by the way that the famous British automotive maker Rover has been bought by the Chinese.

So yeah, I give very good chances that China will be the leading superpower 40 years from now.

Blobber

Originally posted by aryaputhra

[Oh I am Dutch by the way, not even Chinese. Please stay on topic. But reading your nick -are you Indian or Indonesian?

[edit on 21-11-2004 by Blobber]

Dutch? Oh so that explains it

Ja, ek is van indie af. Ek kan praat jou taal 'n bietjie. Duitse en nederlandse mense is baie mooilik. Maar hoekom jy is soos? Onthou, weet jy, ek is 'n bietjie rascist. Ek ken nie die 'chinese' volkeren nie. Ek hoop jy verstaan wat ek se?

Yes, I can understand what you mean -except for "soos". I will not translate it as it may tarnish you . But anyway, to answer your question, I am interested in this thread simply because I am interested in geopolitics and because economics is my field.

Blobber

[edit on 21-11-2004 by Blobber]

A side note regarding India (more directed to aryaputhra), the forreign investments in China is much higher than India (approx 10x). Oh I just read by the way that the famous British automotive maker Rover has been bought by the Chinese.

FDI is China is higher since China opened its market a long time ago. in 1960s where as India opened in 1990s.

ROTFL.. who NEEDS a rover?? What are they going to do with all that streetrovers? At least when BMW was there, they made the Rover 75 and took over land rover. Now that's the only progress they made. Rover had many dealings with Brilliance of China where they made and sold cars. But never really caught popularity with Europeans, particularly the Brits. I guess the Indian designed/licensed Cityrover will be pulled out now.. all the better for TATA, i say.

BTW, are you talking of this newspiece?

business.scotsman.com...

Then again, look at the Indian companies that are on a foreign buying spree - will make the Chinese look like fodder.

fecolumnists.expressindia.com...

Don't worry about me being "tarnished" Blobber. I am okay being called racist or xenophobic. And I can say I am not the only one in this thread (not talking about you, btw)

soos = 'like'





[edit on 21-11-2004 by aryaputhra]

:::Sigh:::

You still missed my point on Russia and Japan. Japan had far more modern weapons and training than the Russians did when they fought them, and at the time there wasn't as large a technology difference. There's a big difference between conducting warfare with 1930s and 40s era weapons and using modern nuclear submarines and carriers.

And Blobber, economic models have predicted things for years that have not come to occur. I wouldn't really rely on them

And China I doubt is going to engage into any huge military buildup on that kind of a grand scale unless the U.S. was also matching it (i.e. another Col War) otherwise it would be too big of a waste of money.

The Chinese have years to advance in terms of communications and electronics technologies military-wise; it is impossible for them to catch up to the U.S. in that; they need to reform their military all around and although their navy and airforce are making advances, their army is still next to nothing; it is mostly obselete.

And no, population does not equal more research that a country like the U.S. couldn't match; only soooo many people do research man; the Soviet Union had far more people than the U.S. did, and it did not outdo the U.S. in research during the Cold War era.

So no, I do not think China will surpass the U.S. in 40 years as a superpower.