China colonel raises nuclear spectre

Mods can you please delete these duplicate posts, I am guessing I have a mouse or Keyboard problem. Thanks in advance.

reply to post by daaskapital


Originally posted by daaskapital

I think the wolf thing was stated metaphorically. They referred to Japan as the wolf, and then went on to state that they hate the wolf out of all animals...

and implicitly saying, they are the Lion (if US is the Tiger..)

Originally posted by voyger2
reply to post by daaskapital

 

Originally posted by daaskapital

I think the wolf thing was stated metaphorically. They referred to Japan as the wolf, and then went on to state that they hate the wolf out of all animals...

and implicitly saying, they are the Lion (if US is the Tiger..)

edit on 22-1-2013 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)

So, if Australia is caught in between, would that make them the Liger? (shafted by both).

reply to post by marsend


I see I have been wasting my time, judging by that response. I didn't realise I was talking to a school child. What good would frieghters be off the coast of Australia with millions of Chinese on board, with no navy or air power to protect them? The Australian Air Force and Navy would sink them like it was target practice. Millions of Chinese soldiers would drown. Forgive me if I ignore you from now on.

reply to post by marsend


I was an enlisted soldier for 20 years in America's army. That being said I have little doubt that I have more combat experience than a Chinese General LOL

I would also tell Australia not to get involved. War is nothing to enter with anything less than 100% commitment. However, supplying China with raw material would be involvement. Can Aussies survive with that kind of hit to the economy?

China and the US are the "big boys". I am not trying to belittle ANY country by saying that. Both of these nations have complete military potential. If China and the US come to blows it will be a loss of life on par with WWII, make no mistake.

A few points I would like to make and I would love to hear feedback on:
1) NO country is safe in the event of non-conventional war

2) China may have 100 billion people but they are not ALL capable of fighting (old, sick, children). Population does not mean soldiers.

3)There comes a time when the people are simply not able to be "fence sitters". Countries will either be taken to provide resources during the conflict, or ostracized for not helping the so-called winner.

4) Do everything in your power (as an individual and a nation) to avoid war. However once a war is upon your nation do everything in your power to support your soldiers.

I have lived the horrors of armed conflict and I would not wish it on my worst enemy (I did have good times too, but these were during a war and not a result of war). If/when two world powers enter conflict, do what ever you can to stay out as long as possible. When/if you do enter anything less than 100% is the same as nothing.

I hope this proves to once again be nothing more than "chest beating" by those who have never been "dirt level" during a shooting war.

reply to post by daaskapital

It sounds like China wants to test the West over Taiwan and some disputed Japanese Islands. Those words indicate future bellicose intent to me.

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by marsend

 

I see I have been wasting my time, judging by that response. I didn't realise I was talking to a school child. What good would frieghters be off the coast of Australia with millions of Chinese on board, with no navy or air power to protect them? The Australian Air Force and Navy would sink them like it was target practice. Millions of Chinese soldiers would drown. Forgive me if I ignore you from now on.

LOL, I expected you to naturally assume that China would provide all the support necessary to achieve such actions. I did not realise that I would have had to spell this out for you. I am also guessing that you haven't spent much time up in the NT, I am also guessing this is your way of backing out, that's fine. After all you quoted one of the most devious governments that have run Aussie for some time, as a fact that kind of said it all to me. I am happy for you to leave this discussion. Peace

reply to post by michael1983l


It would certainly take the gloss off beach holidays in Australia. Could you imagine? Picturesque beaches littered with bodies washing ashore...........not to mention having to fight off over fed sharks with a new found taste for human flesh.....

No, China doesn't have to do anything militarily and it isn't in their nature to be overtly aggressive unless threatened. If it wants to put the thumb screws on, it just has to take economic measures. It has already overtaken Australia as the largest global producer of gold (as just one example).

reply to post by 200Plus


I'm not sure China has 100 Billion people, there are only 7 billion on the whole planet but everything else you say is true aside from Australia needing to sell their raw materials to China. Australia is capable of complete self sustainance.

reply to post by marsend


Your point is again moot as has already been made clear to you. China does not have the ability to project its military power beyond its own local region. I.e., they lack the logistical capacity, Air to Air refuelling, long range aircraft, mobilised vehicles, destroyers, aircraft carriers.... the list goes on. China effectivly has a very large conscript army and lots of bullets and thats your lot.

You also have to take into consideration that should the Chinese land on Australian shores, they would have the wildlife to deal with.....crocs, alligators, scorpions, big mother spiders, skippy and that thing they go on about that looks like a rabid koala bear,

reply to post by 200Plus



Mate, I could not agree more. There is often no greater pacifist than a solider who has experienced the horror of war. I just do not believe that Aussie can sit on the fence, and I do not believe that Aussie has taken care of its own interests as far as our military strength or countries ability to sustain a war, when foreign countries like China make our soldiers boots .

Lets be honest no one wants war, but wars happen. If the USA ever falls, the globe will be carved up by China and Russia if they still exist, I am just not sure which language I need to learn, I am guessing being Asia based it will be Chinese.

LoL I know they don't have 100 billion. I used "may" and I should have used "could" or "might". My point was it's not the entire population that plays a part in a conflict.

I was under the impression that China was a major trading partner with Australia. Any commerce that supported a conflict would be seen as supporting a nation. Food, material, jets, or troops it is all the same thing.

I've worked with the Brits and the Aussies in the past. I would hate to see the bond or soldiers share be lost, but I would be content if it meant less soldier's were in harm's way.

reply to post by daaskapital


that is just retarded. They are close allies of the US and closer allies of the UK....they will do as they please anyways.

They have fought in almost ALL wars either has had to some degree.....

reply to post by michael1983l



Mate, don't assume, assumptions lose wars and cost lives. The Lithgow Small Arms Factory now handles Tourists and stickers not Weapons and Bullets, we have a small military although rather professional. No match for a million of any nation, even if half walked in front of the tanks to deal with the land mines. I have hard we don't have enough reserve bullets to fight a war for one day, net alone fight a real war.

One can argue that a standing army "needs" an enemy. An enemy that if they are not actively fighting, an enemy that would be the one most likely to go to war with.

For at least a couple of years now the PLA has viewed the US as that enemy...

U.S. Alarmed by Harsh Tone of China’s Military - 2010

..and as the OP shows this trend still continues today.

Despite what he Chinese government may say, the PLA does seem to view US and Japan as its enemy.

Originally posted by marsend
reply to post by michael1983l

 

Mate, don't assume, assumptions lose wars and cost lives. The Lithgow Small Arms Factory now handles Tourists and stickers not Weapons and Bullets, we have a small military although rather professional. No match for a million of any nation, even if half walked in front of the tanks to deal with the land mines. I have hard we don't have enough reserve bullets to fight a war for one day, net alone fight a real war.

Its not assumptions, it is detailed studies made by many nations intelligence services. What made you think it was an assumption?

China warns Australia not to side with The US.

The thread title is misleading. I wouldn't worry too much about one nutty Colonel's rantings. He's not even a general and I'm sure the politicians in Beijing will not be pleased with such comments and he will be reprimanded.

This is not from the Chinese leadership they are more skilled at diplomatic relations.

Australia is already an ally of the US, so they are on the side of the US with the ANZUS treaty since WWII.
The US and China are both nuclear powers, it is highly unlikely they will ever enter into full scale warfare.
I'll believe it if it ever happens but I wouldn't hold your breath.


I see the title has now been changed. If China launches nuclear weapons the response from the US nuclear arsenal would be absolute devastation. A completely insane scenario to even contemplate.

Originally posted by SpearMint
Or what?

"Don't start a war with us or we'll start a war with you".

Golden occasion for australians to kick out chinese people from Australia. Just saying...

Oh great, one crazy Chinese colonel using lion and tiger analogies and instead of punching him out like the drunken barfly he so obviously is, we'll go to war over it, killing millions and poisoning the planet further with enough radioactivity to kill everyone a dozen times over.

People who talk like this should have their gonads removed.