China......

[Al Gore]

Last night I spoke with person who is an international investor. He had just gotten back from Beijing China. He stated that that country is growing in wealth at an exponential rate. They are also buying up land all over the world, including the US. The next Super Power.

[lexsooner]

Last night I spoke with person who is an international investor. He had just gotten back from Beijing China. He stated that that country is growing in wealth at an exponential rate. They are also buying up land all over the world, including the US. The next Super Power.

There's no doubt about it. What's even more striking is the size of China's economy is still probably significantly underestimated, even after last year's adjustments which placed it as the world's fourth largest economy behind the U.S., Japan and Germany. China's service industry is still hard for economists to accurately track, and the renmibi is about 20% undervalued, so in reality China's economy is much larger than the official figures. The current projection is China's economy will be the world's largest in about three decades, although the information above indicates it may be a lot sooner.

From what I have read, China is determined to excel in about every major field - economics, finance, high technology, basic science, manufacturing, the military, sports, the arts, etc. Experts have been amazed at how quickly China has caught up or at least made advances in areas in which it has been backwards in, such as basic science and certain high tech fields or biotechnology. I am sure this statement is equally true in other areas like the economy, finance, transportation.

And, we have helped to contribute to this phenomenal growth, for better or for worse, by buying Chinese products which allows China to be cash rich and finance our debts, thus allowing materialistic, debt-ridden Americans to buy even more stuff they don't need. It's really sort of vicious cycle. If Americans really want to do something for their country and our security, they should first try to get out of debt. That has to be one of the greatest threats to our security.

[BoogercountySooner]

China is a large threat to the US Economy. US companies need to tighten up their business and hang on. They build plants over there and then get their technology stolen and then the government builds another plant somewhere else and then they undercut the price of the original plant! Screw China!!

[lexsooner]

China is a large threat to the US Economy. US companies need to tighten up their business and hang on. They build plants over there and then get their technology stolen and then the government builds another plant somewhere else and then they undercut the price of the original plant! Screw China!!

As clearly demonstrated by the highly intelligent and carefully thought out post above, sometimes we are our own worst enemy.

[BoogercountySooner]

As clearly demonstrated by the highly intelligent and carefully thought out post above, sometimes we are our own worst enemy.:confused:

[Okla-homey]

After China eats us, they'll be hungry again in three hours.

So at least we got that going for us...which is nice.

[IB4OU2]

As clearly demonstrated by the highly intelligent and carefully thought out post above, sometimes we are our own worst enemy.

Well said Booger......no interpretation needed.

[yermom]

After China eats us, they'll be hungry again in three hours.

So at least we got that going for us...which is nice.

and it will basically be by our own doing ;)

[lexsooner]

There is culpability on both sides. China does engage in unfair competition. But it is also true American spendaholic habits greatly contribute to this entire problem - when we (consumers and the govt.) spend money we don't have and pay interest on loans and it goes overseas, it strengthens countries overseas like China and weakens the ability of our industries to stay competitive. When we are in the red and debt ridden, we have less capital available to stay competitive and start new businesses. Needless to say, as China's wealth and influence grows, the more it has the ability to successfully lobby our illustrious politicians to improve their situation.

We have to depend on our bureaucrats to try to deal with the issues of unfair competition, politicians we all have little faith in. However, all American consumers can help with the debt issue: don't freakin spend money you don't have. It's all inter-related, whether you like it or not.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

As clearly demonstrated by the highly intelligent and carefully thought out post above, sometimes we are our own worst enemy.We are not capable of THRIVING with an isolationist approach. What is your solution?;)

[lexsooner]

I apologize to BoogercountySooner for my being an a--hole above.

[Desert Sapper]

China has also been successfully playing to our weaknesses with regard to international relations, as well. After Clinton allowed the release of ICBM guidance technology to 'our Chinese friends', the Chinese 'private companies' involved in the trade soon became involved with Pakistan, India, and Iran. Essentially, China has been patiently prodding at our most instable area of influence (the middle east), making more friends than us in the area, and slowly shifting the tables in their favor.

China has also been upgrading its military at a much higher rate than we anticipated even 5 years ago. Within the next 5 years, they will have a portion of their military that is roughly twice the size of our current military outfitted with technology equivalent to our own.

Ultimately, this may mean that China will control at least three spheres of influence against us (economic, military, and political), and could use their patience (the great dragon is noted for this) to find the most opportune moment to exploit our weakness. I pray for all of our sakes that this comes much later than I expect it will.

Thanks for the economic information. The fact that China is our greatest creditor is certainly frightening.

[Penguin]

China has permanently been chosen as our "most favored" trade partner since 1874 (just a guess. I'm too lazy to look up the real date).


It's no wonder that China would eventually become wealthy.

[opksooner]

I read this thread about China about an hour ago.

Now, I don't know anything.

[Rogue]

We need another super power and China is one that doesn't appear hell-bent on blowing us up.

[yermom]

yeah, they are closer to the Middle East and North Korea. maybe they can be the world's policeman now ;)

[Desert Sapper]

We need another super power and China is one that doesn't appear hell-bent on blowing us up.

Not, that is, until the time is just right. Maybe in 5 years. Maybe in 10. Hopefully more like 100. China is pretty patient. I just don't want to be around when the great Dragon swallows the Eagle (and probably the Bear, too).

[Okla-homey]

We need another super power and China is one that doesn't appear hell-bent on blowing us up.

History people, history.

At no time in the last 500 years of Chinese history have they evar demonstrated imperialist tendencies. They are quite content to achieve hegemony on their end of the mainland continent of Asia. That's otay by moi.

Further, a billion nuclear-capable Indians to their south will keep them honest.

No sweat.

All is well.

[Penguin]

No sweat.

All is well.


Thank God. I'm going back to bed.

[OklahomaTuba]

Japan didn't have imperialistic tendencies either homey. IMO, China right now is what Japan was during the Meiji Restoration.

Oil is the only thing thats gonna keep China from growing.

Same thing with India. All the more important reason we figure out some new alternatives with a strong foothold in the mideast.

[lexsooner]

We need another super power and China is one that doesn't appear hell-bent on blowing us up.

Agreed. Attacking the U.S. would be like China shooting itself in its own foot. China badly needs access to American consumers to fuel its rapid economic growth. More than anything, China today wants the same greatness it achieved during its ancient imperial past. The U.S. consumer market is the key to this goal. China is currently cash rich enough in money from selling its products overseas to create total economic chaos in the U.S. by dumping the excess dollars onto the world currency market, sending our inflation and interest rates sky high and killing the real estate market. However, it won't happen because it is kind of an economic mutually assured destruction, since that would mean Americans would not be as able to afford their products.

We also badly need another super power to help fight terrorism. Eventually, as China becomes a super power, it will be the target of Muslim terrorism from Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim country, Malaysia, the Phillipines, and SW Asia too. I have the feeling the Chinese will be much more heavy handed in dealing with Muslim terrorism. Nevertheless, in this world we badly need friends, even if they are economic competitors.

[Cam]

The Chinese backed purchase of IBM's personal computer division by Lenova was a huge salvo on our economy IMO. It set a precident that will allow other major buys in the future.

[BoogercountySooner]

I apologize to BoogercountySooner for my being an a--hole above.

No Problem Lex!:O

[Penguin]

I'm going to order some Chinese food for dinner. Sweet & sour chicken would really hit the spot right now.

[OklahomaTuba]

The Chinese backed purchase of IBM's personal computer division by Lenova was a huge salvo on our economy IMO. It set a precident that will allow other major buys in the future.

They have already tried to buy 2 Major US oil companies.

I think that is much more worrisome.

[Penguin]

That S&S chicken was good. Damn good.


Anybody in the Westchase area of Houston should really check out Pang Tai's. Good stuff.

[Okla-homey]

Japan didn't have imperialistic tendencies either homey. IMO, China right now is what Japan was during the Meiji Restoration.

Oil is the only thing thats gonna keep China from growing.

Same thing with India. All the more important reason we figure out some new alternatives with a strong foothold in the mideast.

Bullshiite. Complete unmitigated bullshiite. Stop being paranoid

No offense. ;)

India is a bud. Nothing will change that. We share a language and the fact we and they used to be the UK's beyonce. They are, after all, the world's largest democracy. Therefore, we won't fight them and they won't pick a fight with us.

China is not interested in anything but owning their end of Asia. I say we let'em have it. There's no oil there and you can't farm nothing over there on their end but rice.

[royalfan5]

Bullshiite. Complete unmitigated bullshiite. Stop being paranoid

No offense. ;)

India is a bud. Nothing will change that. We share a language and the fact we and they used to be the UK's beyonce. They are, after all, the world's largest democracy. Therefore, we won't fight them and they won't pick a fight with us.

China is not interested in anything but owning their end of Asia. I say we let'em have it. There's no oil there and you can't farm nothing over there on their end but rice.
China does very well with Corn and soybeans as well, and with American Seed companies aggressive working in that market China will make strides in Agriculture just like South America has. Of course the big Agbus multinationals are American controlled, so many Americans will benifit from this.

[Al Gore]

China is not interested in anything but owning their end of Asia. I say we let'em have it. There's no oil there and you can't farm nothing over there on their end but rice.I believe he said last year was the first year they had to import food......

[JohnnyMack]

Japan didn't have imperialistic tendencies either homey. IMO, China right now is what Japan was during the Meiji Restoration.

Oil is the only thing thats gonna keep China from growing.

Same thing with India. All the more important reason we figure out some new alternatives with a strong foothold in the mideast.

The imperialistic tendencies exhibited by our current leader must give you a raging stiffy.

[Octavian]

China reminds me of a mid-19th century Germany (but has to deal w/ a superpower the likes of which the Germans never faced).

Everyone knows they're coming up...but they're a long way away from legitimate superpower status. They've got a ton of domestic problems to deal with and their military size and scope is relatively weak.

The bright side is that (unlike a century ago) both sides seem to want to avoid direct conflict and both realize theres just too much dough to be made off each other.

We shouldn't let them buy up all our Treasury notes though...thats scary. Our trade deficit w/ them disturbs us, our massive deficit spending disturbs them (which is partly why they refuse to change the value of their currency). They've done a incredibly good job of working their way into the developing world's oil supplies and we should be always be worried about the Tiawan issue.

IMO the worst we could do is to alienate others and isolate ourselves, pushing more nations into an opposing camp that they'd naturally lead.

Also, their youngest generation views Western products (technology, entertainment, the NBA is booming there) as cool and with-it. It would take a monumental ****-up to let the relationship slip into conflict. But if it did...well I dont wanna think about that.

[Okla-homey]

Until they build a blue water navy and get slant deck carriers, they ain't nothing but poseurs. Seriously.

[JohnnyMack]

We shouldn't let them buy up all our Treasury notes though...thats scary. Our trade deficit w/ them disturbs us, our massive deficit spending disturbs them (which is partly why they refuse to change the value of their currency). They've done a incredibly good job of working their way into the developing world's oil supplies and we should be always be worried about the Tiawan issue.


Thing is they don't give a **** about the Dollar. They're doing what they can to offset their heavy Dollar position by diversifying their holdings. They're doing what they can to buy up gold (mines included) and don't be surprised if they don't get in bed with the Iranian Oil Bourse that'll go live in March and use the Euro in an effort to further weaken the Dollar.

[Howzit]

*** DISCLAIMER - AS USUAL I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HECK I'M TALKING ABOUT ***


US companies are investing big $ in China right now. Wouldn't they care about the dollar in that they want the investment to continue?

[Okla-homey]

the ol' dollar is looks pretty stout to me right about now.

http://www.xe.com/

[Frozen Sooner]

China has permanently been chosen as our "most favored" trade partner since 1874 (just a guess. I'm too lazy to look up the real date).


It's no wonder that China would eventually become wealthy.


OK, this post shows a misconception about "most favored nation" status that is fairly persistent.

"Most Favored Nation" is a category, not an exclusive descriptor. Simply means that we don't have any special tariffs levied against trade with the country. Libya has MFN status for example.

Well, actually, nobody has MFN status anymore, as they finally changed the misleading name to "Normal Trade Relations."

[JohnnyMack]

For those not concerned about the status of the Dollar, and not concerned about China's position in relation to said Dollar wouldn't be interested in the following:

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/13905099.htm

As far as the question, is China a good investment? Sure it is. Will the money you make investing on Chinese companies be worth anything if a depression were to kick in due to a dollar that is worth half of what it's currently worth? Who knows? I just hate America, kick puppies and burn crosses. That's what I do.

[Penguin]

OK, this post shows a misconception about "most favored nation" status that is fairly persistent.

"Most Favored Nation" is a category, not an exclusive descriptor. Simply means that we don't have any special tariffs levied against trade with the country. Libya has MFN status for example.

Well, actually, nobody has MFN status anymore, as they finally changed the misleading name to "Normal Trade Relations."

How dare you point out my ignorance! I's ignorant for a reason and I want to stay that way! :D

[JohnnyMack]

China needs oil. ****loads of oil. Why do they need oil?

1. Energy. China's oil consumption will be #2 behind the U.S.'s soon.

2. Lene's. You know, ethylenes, propylene, polypropylene, etc. The building blocks of plastic. Plastic that is turned into the piles and piles of **** that lines Wal-Marts shelves.

Why wouldn't it worry us if the Chinese were importing its oil from Iran, to turn it into plastic crap that is imported to the U.S.? I mean what we're likely to do is just build our own manufacturing plants and supply our own people with both the goods we need and the high paying jobs they'd demand in order to produce said items, right? There was no reason that all that manufacturing got sent overseas in the first place was there? Oh, what's that you're saying? There was? We allowed giant monopolies to force down the prices they would pay their suppliers for products and as wages didn't decline, the suppliers were forced to seek other countries who could produce the products at a lower rate and satiate the American consumers constant quest for cheaper **** and more of it. This isn't an attack on W, this is an indictment of the systemic failures of our Government who for decades saw the ballooning trade imbalance with China and didn't take the tough steps necessary to stem the outward flow of jobs and dollars.

[Frozen Sooner]

How dare you point out my ignorance! I's ignorant for a reason and I want to stay that way! :D

Heh. It's just one of those things that makes people with Econ degrees go all pear-shaped.

[Palermo10]

Until they build a blue water navy and get slant deck carriers, they ain't nothing but poseurs. Seriously.


Why do they need a military stronger than ours to become an economic superpower? That is the point of the thread and general consensus, that the Chinese economy is growing at an exponential rate and will soon be a sort of central point for trends and movements.

Without the aforementioned military assets I suppose we can be assured that they won't misuse them and puncture holes in their economic standing or government budgets to the tune of $30 billion al mes.

[Okla-homey]

Why do they need a military stronger than ours to become an economic superpower? That is the point of the thread and general consensus, that the Chinese economy is growing at an exponential rate and will soon be a sort of central point for trends and movements.

Without the aforementioned military assets I suppose we can be assured that they won't misuse them and puncture holes in their economic standing or government budgets to the tune of $30 billion al mes.

D00d,

Here's what started the thread:


Last night I spoke with person who is an international investor. He had just gotten back from Beijing China. He stated that that country is growing in wealth at an exponential rate. They are also buying up land all over the world, including the US. The next Super Power.

"Superpower" status still means a nation-state which has achieved a compelling combination of 1) diplomatic, 2) informational, 3) military and 4) economic power and is ready and willing to wield all four to achieve its national objectives. I'm old fashioned that way.

Without all four, but especially the last two -- economic and military; a state simply isn't a superpower. A state is wealthy if it possesses economic power alone, but economic power without military, diplomatic and informational power to back it up is fleeting and these states will always be reliant on powerful superpower allies with diplomatic, informational, military and economic power to protect them. Remember Kuwait in August 1990? France, Holland, Belgium in 1940? Singapore 1941?

[lexsooner]

Yep, China will clearly be there with the other three factors, but it is the longest way off with its military. A true superpower has to have a military to have credibility. Economic and other influences have their limitations, but brute force or the threat thereof are sometimes needed.

China has recently increased its military spending, but for some reason it does not seem to be a real high priority. They probably figure it will come with time, and with technological advances it will eventually be able to build its own modern military which will include blue water navy capabilities.

Right now, China is playing a soft influence game around the world, offering things up, making deals left and right, buying favors. It is highly effective, but in the long run I see a modern military buildup which will occur slowly but surely, not so fast to alarm the whole world, but it will happen.

[Okla-homey]

Yep, China will clearly be there with the other three factors, but it is the longest way off with its military. A true superpower has to have a military to have credibility. Economic and other influences have their limitations, but brute force or the threat thereof are sometimes needed.

China has recently increased its military spending, but for some reason it does not seem to be a real high priority. They probably figure it will come with time, and with technological advances it will eventually be able to build its own modern military which will include blue water navy capabilities.

Right now, China is playing a soft influence game around the world, offering things up, making deals left and right, buying favors. It is highly effective, but in the long run I see a modern military buildup which will occur slowly but surely, not so fast to alarm the whole world, but it will happen.

I honestly don't think China is really concerned about strategic power-projection capabilities. I respectfully insist they are primarily concerned with defending themselves -- as you know, they have a long history of suffering foreign incursion and thus its practically coded into their DNA to want to guard against future incursions by achieving mastery of their third of the Asian landmass.

Sure, I concede they'd love to get their mits on Taiwan, but you can make a colorable argument that that should be construed as merely regaining territory they lost when the Nationalists holed-up over there.

[OklahomaTuba]

Bullshiite. Complete unmitigated bullshiite. Stop being paranoid

China is not interested in anything but owning their end of Asia. I say we let'em have it. There's no oil there and you can't farm nothing over there on their end but rice.

Thats my point. There is no oil there. They need oil, BAD.

They have so many refineries, petrochemical plants and powerplants coming online in the next 5 years, that alone is going to drive crude up 10-20%.

That is why they have already tried to buy a US major oil company, and are throwing tons of money at Canada, Venezuala and Iran.

Mark it down. Even though Iran is next door to China, China won't give two ****s about seeing a nutty *** fundamentalist terror state gain nukes in fear their oil supply will decline.

They need Irans oil, simple as that!

And the sad fact is, we do too.

[lexsooner]

Thats my point. There is no oil there. They need oil, BAD.

They have so many refineries, petrochemical plants and powerplants coming online in the next 5 years, that alone is going to drive crude up 10-20%.

That is why they have already tried to buy a US major oil company, and are throwing tons of money at Canada, Venezuala and Iran.

Mark it down. Even though Iran is next door to China, China won't give two ****s about seeing a nutty *** fundamentalist terror state gain nukes in fear their oil supply will decline.

They need Irans oil, simple as that!

And the sad fact is, we do too.

I totally agree there are dangerous issues on the horizon with China, most notably the limited supply of oil in this world. China and India are going to only get bigger and need more oil to fuel their industries. Taiwan, of course, is another potential flash point. Somehow I get the feeling if North Korea ever becomes a nuclear threat or otherwise threatens world stability, China will step on them like a bug because China does not want anything getting in the way of its tremendous growth.

However, I don't agree China is looking in the future to take on the U.S. militarily. The old Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Japan, were driven by their ideologies. China is entirely driven by pragmatism, a goal to become a great nation once again through high tech, science, industry, finance, etc. etc. Taking on the U.S. military is simply not part of their grand scheme. China may be Communist in name and the country is ruled by an iron fist by the party, BUT in free-wheeling capitalistic China, the actual practice of communism is dying fast. Chinese leaders are much more interested in making deals with other countries and gain influence in order to make money, rather than spreading communism to other countries.

This does not mean, of course, that they will not eventually modernize and build up their military. I disagree with Homey to the extent that I think China will eventually realize being an economic powerhouse is not enough, and it will have to have a powerful, modern military to be a true superpower. Frankly, if they eventually become a world leader along with the U.S., they will sometime along with way have a real need for a blue water navy to steam to hot spots in the world to protect their interests. I think it's in their plans, but first things first.

[OklahomaTuba]

What I don't want to see happen is Sinopec or CNOC taking ownership of any major US oil or refining companies.

They have already tried.

Chavez owning Citgo is bad enough.

[OklahomaTuba]

Well lookie here...Iran just bought off China.

Instead of oil for food, we have oil for nukes.


Mark it down. Even though Iran is next door to China, China won't give two ****s about seeing a nutty *** fundamentalist terror state gain nukes in fear their oil supply will decline.

They need Irans oil, simple as that!



Iran and China have been discussing a major energy deal that would involve the swap of oil for technology.

Western diplomatic sources said the two countries have been examining an agreement that would make Iran the leading oil supplier to China. The sources said the long-term deal was valued at $100 billion.http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/06/front2453787.0493055554.html

Like I said, China doesn't give two ****s about Iran having nukes as long as they have oil.

So much for their help in being a world leader.

[JohnnyMack]

Well lookie here...Iran just bought off China.

Instead of oil for food, we have oil for nukes.



http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/06/front2453787.0493055554.html

Like I said, China doesn't give two ****s about Iran having nukes as long as they have oil.

So much for their help in being a world leader.

:P You're only a few days late. Do you even read my posts anymore? I don't even know who you are anymore.


For those not concerned about the status of the Dollar, and not concerned about China's position in relation to said Dollar wouldn't be interested in the following:

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/13905099.htm

[Desert Sapper]

This does not mean, of course, that they will not eventually modernize and build up their military.

China is already well underway with upgrading their military. They have a relatively modern Navy, the largest in Asia. They aren't even close to rivaling our Navy yet, but they wouldn't need to initially.


As of 2003 the PLA Navy numbered 290,000 personnel, while the US Department of Defense estimated that the PLAN numbered approximately 260,000 personnel in the year 2000. The Navy is equipped with approximately 60 destroyers and frigates, about 50 diesel and six nuclear submarines, and some 40 amphibious landing ships. Approximately 350 auxiliary and smaller patrol vessels, as well as a naval air arm of over 500 fixed-wing aircraft [mostly obsolescent] and 50 helicopters, complement this force.

In addition, there is a large fleet of about 600 landing craft, both military and civilian, that could be used for ship-to-shore operations, as well as a handful of air cushion vehicles. Using these assets, China can sealift about one division of 10,000 men. The PLAN also has hundreds of smaller landing craft, barges, and troop transports, all of which could be used together with fishing boats, trawlers, and civilian merchant ships to augment the naval amphibious fleet. The size of the major surface combatant fleet has been relatively stable, with older ships slowly being replaced by newer Chinese-built destroyers and frigates.


The PLA believes the Ground Forces need to possess higher mobility and greater firepower. The Ground Forces began a process of reorganization and re-equipment in 1998. The objectives were to increase speed and mobility, to strengthen the Army's cross-sea projection for a possible Taiwan war, and to continue to reduce the size of the Army while improving its combat ability. The PLA is following the concept the US Army initiated with the Stryker Brigades.

NORINCO developed three new wheeled combat vehicles in 2003. These include a 120mm gun armed eight-wheeled tank destroyer, another eight-wheeled vehicle armed with a 120mm howitzer or mortar, and a lighter 105mm gun armed six-wheeled tank destroyer based on the WZ 551 chassis. The intention is to complete, serialize and form a wheeled armored car family of the medium type brigades under preparation. Compared to a normal 50-ton main battle tank, the weight of most of this equipment was kept under 20 tons. The 120mm gun armed eight-wheeled tank destroyer exceeds 30 tons. They can all be carried by the Ilyushin I1-76 transport used by the Chinese Air Force, and the Xian Y-8 [a Chinese copy of the Russian An-12] is capable of carrying the wheeled armored vehicles based on the WZ551.

They are in the process of updating all of their armored forces with the Type 98 MBT (a variant of the Russian T-90). The Type 98 has a 125 mm main gun with an active tracking system for the commander. It has shoot-on-the-move capability, like our M1 Abrams.


The Type 98 also includes some type of previously unknown active self-defense system. The two components of this active self defense system are mounted on the turret roof. The LWR (Laser Warning Receiver) is mounted behind commander's hatch, and a high-powered laser weapon mounted behind gunner's hatch which is employed against the source of the enemy's laser illumination.

They currently have about 200 Type-98s in their inventory (with the rest of their units fielding Type-96s and Type-85s - all much better MBTs than the old Soviet T-80; Saddam's most advanced piece of equipment). At the rate of 20 Type-98s per year, they should have the equivalent of our Tank inventory by 2010.

Their airforce is essentially outdated. They are in the process of overhauling their airforce to include some fighter-bomber upgrades to the FB-7 from the F-7 and F-8 (the equivalent of the Mig-19 and 21 respectively) and upgrades to an equivalent Mig-27 and Mig-29. They recently began negotiations with France (in 2004) to repeal the 15-year ban on military trades with China. This ban was emplaced after Tienanmen square, and likely won't be repealed soon. If it is, China could quickly use their growing capital to purchase a new Air Force.

China is not ready to do anything even regionally yet. When China does decide to do something, it will likely already be too late. In the mean time, we can fret about their economic growth, but we should keep an eye on the horizon. That is to say, when China (with its size and ever-increasing technological upgrades) does decide to make regional (and possibly global) power moves, there may not be anything relevant that we can do.

I suspect they won't use those spheres until they have a decided advantage in all of them.

[skycat]

All I know is that the quality of the engineering coming out of my company's Chineese design centers succs monkies.

[Palermo10]

I realize as Okies we have a tendency to be gung ho. Perhaps I just have a different interpretation of "superpower" in the coming decades. One in which a very globalized world places far more emphasis on the sort of economic weight you carry, and less on the military.

We supposedly have an awesome military... and yet China is becoming the center for commerce. What does that leave us with? Overpaid guns and nothing to shoot at? Just thinking aloud. It will be interesting to see....

[lexsooner]

I realize as Okies we have a tendency to be gung ho. Perhaps I just have a different interpretation of "superpower" in the coming decades. One in which a very globalized world places far more emphasis on the sort of economic weight you carry, and less on the military.

We supposedly have an awesome military... and yet China is becoming the center for commerce. What does that leave us with? Overpaid guns and nothing to shoot at? Just thinking aloud. It will be interesting to see....

We will always have military opponents and enemies, real or imagined. The Military Industrial Complex will see to it. They gotta make sure the defense industry stays in business.

[Okla-homey]

China is not ready to do anything even regionally yet. When China does decide to do something, it will likely already be too late. In the mean time, we can fret about their economic growth, but we should keep an eye on the horizon. That is to say, when China (with its size and ever-increasing technological upgrades) does decide to make regional (and possibly global) power moves, there may not be anything relevant that we can do.

I suspect they won't use those spheres until they have a decided advantage in all of them.

DS,
I'll make you a deal, if China ever tries to make a power play outside of Asia, including of course re-gaining Taiwanhich i think they'd like to do and the vast majority of that build-up you cite would facilitate, I'll volunteer to come out of retirement and be an ALO with one of your 4ID manuever brigades.;)

[Stoop Dawg]

We supposedly have an awesome military... and yet China is becoming the center for commerce. What does that leave us with? Overpaid guns and nothing to shoot at? Just thinking aloud. It will be interesting to see....

What does that leave us with? Our freedom.

I don't give 2 ****s whether China has a bigger economy than the U.S. I care that I get to live my life in a free country, vote for my leaders (even if the wrong ones win from time to time), and work in a capitalist society. As long as we have a military, we have our freedom. That's how I see it.

I read that China is "relocating" 400,000 of its citizens to accomodate the Olympics. Given their storied past, I certainly don't want to live under their rule. So fine, let them compete (or contribute) in the global economy. I happy for it. Just leave us poor Americans the hell alone. Thanks.

[Desert Sapper]

DS,
I'll make you a deal, if China ever tries to make a power play outside of Asia, including of course re-gaining Taiwanhich i think they'd like to do and the vast majority of that build-up you cite would facilitate, I'll volunteer to come out of retirement and be an ALO with one of your 4ID manuever brigades.;)

I just hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime. We got thrashed by the Chinese in Korea when they were trying to kill people off (traitors to the communist cause - White Army human waves). I'm not sure I ever want to see that many people maneuvering tactically on the battlefield against me. If they are even moderately close to our technological capabilities, it won't even last a week. The bottom line here is that they are slowly developing more and more capability economically, politically, and militarily. Patience is the dragon's greatest virtue. It isn't ours.

[Stoop Dawg]

Just in case anyone read this thread and thought "Man, China has it all figured out"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060221/bs_nm/economy_hongkong_inequality_dc

[Palermo10]

What does that leave us with? Our freedom.

I don't give 2 ****s whether China has a bigger economy than the U.S. I care that I get to live my life in a free country, vote for my leaders (even if the wrong ones win from time to time), and work in a capitalist society. As long as we have a military, we have our freedom. That's how I see it.


Ireland isn't free? Switzerland isn't free? New Zealand? These countries and their militaries aren't found starting trouble or "defending" interests all over the world (3 rowboats and a canoe to help the US doesnt count)... yet they share many of the same freedoms you and I do.

Don't get all worked up over this saving freedom rubbish simply because China is doing well economically. Unless you see them as a threat because of what you might think of how the United States handles its place as a superpower. In which case we go down a different road. Spain is not at war with anyone. I bought a soda yesterday. Rode the bus. Talked loud on the subway. Went to a bar. I can do the same things in the US.

[Desert Sapper]

We will always have military opponents and enemies, real or imagined. The Military Industrial Complex will see to it. They gotta make sure the defense industry stays in business.

In case you were wondering, it wasn't Oliver Stone that first noted this beast. It can be dangerous, but it's still important to our overall security as a nation. Here's Ike's take:

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html


In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

[Stoop Dawg]

Ireland isn't free? Switzerland isn't free? New Zealand? These countries and their militaries aren't found starting trouble or "defending" interests all over the world (3 rowboats and a canoe to help the US doesnt count)... yet they share many of the same freedoms you and I do.

Don't get all worked up over this saving freedom rubbish simply because China is doing well economically. Unless you see them as a threat because of what you might think of how the United States handles its place as a superpower. In which case we go down a different road. Spain is not at war with anyone. I bought a soda yesterday. Rode the bus. Talked loud on the subway. Went to a bar. I can do the same things in the US.

Clearly the fact that the U.S. is "free" doesn't preclude other countries from also being "free". I thought that was self-evident and didn't need to be said.

Someone questioned why we needed a strong military and I responded "to protect our freedoms".

Rampant imperialism does seem to have died off, and we do have two big oceans on either side of us. But I don't think we should consider dismantling the entire military. But that's just my opinion.

[Harry Beanbag]

I just hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime. We got thrashed by the Chinese in Korea when they were trying to kill people off (traitors to the communist cause - White Army human waves). I'm not sure I ever want to see that many people maneuvering tactically on the battlefield against me. If they are even moderately close to our technological capabilities, it won't even last a week. The bottom line here is that they are slowly developing more and more capability economically, politically, and militarily. Patience is the dragon's greatest virtue. It isn't ours.


Well, I think that's the key. Never get in a ground war with China in a country bordering China. Manpower will eventually overwhelm you no matter how much better trained and equipped your army is. Hitler learned that lesson with the Soviets as we did with China in Korea.

I think Homey is right about China. They have historically for thousands of years only sought to protect what they felt was theirs, hence the Great Wall. I think the only possible problem we will have with them militarily is when they decide to reclaim Taiwan. We have vowed to protect Taiwan, but at what cost? Our military isn't capable of invading Iran right now, let alone taking on China in their backyard.

[Palermo10]

Clearly the fact that the U.S. is "free" doesn't preclude other countries from also being "free". I thought that was self-evident and didn't need to be said.

Cmon.... you know I didnt say that. :confused: What I gave were examples of countries who don't feel the need to have military stationed at all corners of the globe, and yet get by just fine.



Someone questioned why we needed a strong military and I responded "to protect our freedoms".

Rampant imperialism does seem to have died off, and we do have two big oceans on either side of us. But I don't think we should consider dismantling the entire military. But that's just my opinion.

I didnt claim that either. Nor did anyone else. You said as long as we have "our military, we have our freedom" - right, well said countries have a military a fraction of the size and budget of "ours," and have their freedom as well. That's all I was getting at. Getting back on topic, that's why I dont think China needs to overtake the United States in military anything in order to be considered (by me) a "superpower." 100 years ago though, certainly.

[Stoop Dawg]

You said as long as we have "our military, we have our freedom" - right, well said countries have a military a fraction of the size and budget of "ours," and have their freedom as well.

Sorry if I was gruff. There's not much reasonable debate around here lately. :(

I just don't think the fact that other countries don't have a sizeable military necessarily means that we don't need one either. I don't have a bodyguard and I'm not in any danger from day to day. But that certainly doesn't mean that nobody else needs security, right? Different people (and countries) need different amounts of security - and not necessarily because those people (or countries) are going around ****ing people off. As mentioned earlier, when you're the wealthiest country on the globe it's impossible not to **** someone off.

As to what would be an adequate size for the US military - well, hopefully that is debated frequently by people much smarter than me. Apparently it's too small to occupy even a small country like Iraq.

[OklahomaTuba]

Ireland isn't free? Switzerland isn't free? New Zealand? These countries and their militaries aren't found starting trouble or "defending" interests all over the world (3 rowboats and a canoe to help the US doesnt count)... yet they share many of the same freedoms you and I do.

Don't get all worked up over this saving freedom rubbish simply because China is doing well economically. Unless you see them as a threat because of what you might think of how the United States handles its place as a superpower. In which case we go down a different road. Spain is not at war with anyone. I bought a soda yesterday. Rode the bus. Talked loud on the subway. Went to a bar. I can do the same things in the US.

Gee, I wonder why places like Ireland, Switzerland, New Zealand are free states now?

Perhaps its the same reason that you can walk around Spain right now not living in a Nazi or Communist police state run by big German or Russian folks???

:rolleyes:

[SoonerProphet]

three words, heavily armed neutrality.

[GDC]

Someone said our problem is that in China, people like Bill Gates and Nobel Prize winners are worshipped like Britney Spears, but in the US Britney Spears is Britney Spears. Or something like that.

[swardboy]

Damn that Jack Bauer for killing the Chinese embassy guy.....

[Palermo10]

Perhaps its the same reason that you can walk around Spain right now not living in a Nazi or Communist police state run by big German or Russian folks???

:rolleyes:


I'd like to play the rolling eyes game too. But let me explain something: Spain was not involved in World War II, as Spain was experiencing and had experienced a civil war. Facism won out in Spain until the 70s. Spain was not part of the Marshall Plan despite having a decimated country.

Why is that again? Because Spain was not involved in World War II.

So my reaction to your "Nazi or Communist police state run by big German or Russian folks" ?

...:rolleyes:


And StoopDawg - no worries bro. But about the size - I dont think size is the problem. Its urban warfare that our military isnt trained for. Its surprise attacks from people in plain clothes. What can you do? Just a bad situation. If anybody wanted to, they could wreak havoc on US soldiers just by taking a few minutes to install a roadside bomb before sneaking back into civilian life. I can't imagine being the one to have to figure out a way to stop it :(
If the nation of Iraq had an army we'd overrun them easily. Oh wait...

[skycat]

Someone said our problem is that in China, people like Bill Gates and Nobel Prize winners are worshipped like Britney Spears, but in the US Britney Spears is Britney Spears. Or something like that.

I would just like to reiterate that Chinese engineers are the suck.

At least those that work for my company.

I was reminded of this, this very morning. :mad::mad:

[TexasLidig8r]

The sticking point, in the next decade, could very well be Taiwan.

Taiwan has the 17th largest gross national product in the world today... its largest export trading partner? Mainland China.

Mainland China still claims Taiwan as one of its republics.

Eventually, Taiwan may very well formally declare independence.... that could be the catalyst for China to intervene militarily.

Whereas the Taiwan Relations Act does not expressly require the US to come to the aid of Taiwan in the event Taiwan is militarily attacked, the purpose and good faith interpretation of the Act is that such conduct would be "required."

Do we militarily have the capacity to render aid before it's a fait accompli? Not likely.

[SoonerProphet]

Eventually, Taiwan may very well formally declare independence.... that could be the catalyst for China to intervene militarily.

That'd be a bad move on their part. They are Chinese after all.

[Desert Sapper]

What I gave were examples of countries who don't feel the need to have military stationed at all corners of the globe, and yet get by just fine.

...said countries have a military a fraction of the size and budget of "ours," and have their freedom as well. That's all I was getting at.

Two of the countries that you mentioned are island nations and the third is surrounded by some of the highest mountains in the world. Nepal is another country for you. There is a reason it has not been threatened by the sizeable militaries that surround it on at least three sides (Pakistan, India, and China). A large military is not a necessity for being free, but a strong deterrent to other militaries is. There will always be violent men in charge of nations. It is the size and authority of the US Military that prevents many of these nations from imposing on the freedom of their neighbors. Our move on Afghanistan in 2001 and on Iraq in 2003 sent a powerful message to the world, regardless of the political implications.

[Desert Sapper]

Do we militarily have the capacity to render aid before it's a fait accompli? Not likely.

At this point, it may be a carrier group and several sorties of fighter-bombers that seals off the Taiwanese border. We just don't have the personnel to put anything on the ground.

[Palermo10]

Two of the countries that you mentioned are island nations and the third is surrounded by some of the highest mountains in the world. Nepal is another country for you. There is a reason it has not been threatened by the sizeable militaries that surround it on at least three sides (Pakistan, India, and China). A large military is not a necessity for being free, but a strong deterrent to other militaries is. There will always be violent men in charge of nations. It is the size and authority of the US Military that prevents many of these nations from imposing on the freedom of their neighbors. Our move on Afghanistan in 2001 and on Iraq in 2003 sent a powerful message to the world, regardless of the political implications.


Very good points. But your last statement... what message?
If its about going into nations with difficult terrain then I suppose so. But these things weren't exactly taken care of right away. Unless you are taking strictly in terms of initial invasion.

Also did not mean to throw out island countries for examples :) Can I say France instead? Romania? Regardless... you know what I was getting at! :P

[JohnnyMack]

At this point, it may be a carrier group and several sorties of fighter-bombers that seals off the Taiwanese border. We just don't have the personnel to put anything on the ground.

We tried to blockade Japan's trade routes back in the early 40's. On about 12/07/41 they decided they had had enough.

[JohnnyMack]

Very good points. But your last statement... what message?
If its about going into nations with difficult terrain then I suppose so. But these things weren't exactly taken care of right away. Unless you are taking strictly in terms of initial invasion.


That we won't finish what we started in Afghanistan and Iraq is a quagmire of epic proportions that is about as winnable as Tetris?

[Stoop Dawg]

Can I say France instead?

No. France would not be free if not for allies that did have a military!

[Stoop Dawg]

And StoopDawg - no worries bro. But about the size - I dont think size is the problem. Its urban warfare that our military isnt trained for. Its surprise attacks from people in plain clothes. What can you do? Just a bad situation. If anybody wanted to, they could wreak havoc on US soldiers just by taking a few minutes to install a roadside bomb before sneaking back into civilian life. I can't imagine being the one to have to figure out a way to stop it :(
If the nation of Iraq had an army we'd overrun them easily. Oh wait...

Invasion and occupation are certainly two entirely different things. I don't think it's our intention to occupy Iraq for long (I certainly hope not), but as critics point out it's difficult to establish stability when the citizens hate each other. I'm certainly no social expert, but simply dividing the country into two pieces seems like the logical thing to do. It worked for India, mostly. Right?

And back to the topic of China -- I like their food. I have no problem with China's economy surpasing the U.S. In fact, I kinda wish it would. Then *we* could complain that *they* don't send enough aid to world disasters! "Hey! We had a hurricane here! You better send us some money, you rich Chinese bastards!!" I like it!

[Harry Beanbag]

No. France would not be free if not for allies that did have a military!


France has been conquered more times than Madonna.

[JohnnyMack]

France has been conquered more times than 1tc at the midnight premier of Brokeback Mountain.

This is fun! :D

[Palermo10]

And back to the topic of China -- I like their food. I have no problem with China's economy surpasing the U.S. In fact, I kinda wish it would.


That's why I keep rooting for Mexico...

[Desert Sapper]

Very good points. But your last statement... what message?

That whole, don't f*** with us, because we aren't playing paddy-cake anymore message.



If its about going into nations with difficult terrain then I suppose so.

I'm not sure which Afghanistan you've been to, but the terrain isn't exactly easy there. Iraq has some dense terrain, too. It's called Baghdad.



But these things weren't exactly taken care of right away. Unless you are taking strictly in terms of initial invasion.

The initial invasion was the only conventional fight involved. Keep in mind that we lost 50,000+ in Vietnam because we had to fight a conventional fight in addition to the unconventional fight with insurgents. These are strictly fights against the insurgents. These terms like quagmire only come up because people believe what they see on the news. Unfortunately, there isn't any other real option, because the reality is always clouded over by the political agendas of our media outlets. Things are progressing every day in Afghanistan and Iraq. We are moving more and more toward Iraqis and Afghanis taking back their own streets. Our biggest concern is moving out too soon and allowing another 1975 Saigon to happen. We want this to end successfully. It can, but it will take time.


Also did not mean to throw out island countries for examples :) Can I say France instead? Romania? Regardless... you know what I was getting at! :P

Any country in Western Europe, Central America, and Asia knows that the US has its back. So, for all intents and purposes, those countries don't have to have their own big military to stay free. They already have ours.

[Stoop Dawg]

Any country in Western Europe, Central America, and Asia knows that the US has its back. So, for all intents and purposes, those countries don't have to have their own big military to stay free. They already have ours.

And they're not afraid to tell us how to use it!

[Palermo10]

I'm not sure which Afghanistan you've been to, but the terrain isn't exactly easy there. Iraq has some dense terrain, too. It's called Baghdad.



That was me agreeing with you....

I dont see how the invasions make us any sort of super power. If anything they show our weaknesses using anything short of a nuclear weapon.

Likewise I reiterate my initial idea that China does not need some superior military. Economic and political allies reinforce that. And methinks that would be a tough country to invade as well.

[Desert Sapper]

That was me agreeing with you....

Sorry, missed that you said with difficult terrain as opposed to without. There goes my critical reading skill level down the drain.


I dont see how the invasions make us any sort of super power. If anything they show our weaknesses using anything short of a nuclear weapon.

The invasions don't make us a superpower. We were a superpower after we came to aid the French in the Great War (being the first world war). We were one of two remaining superpowers after the second world war. We have never fallen off the radar. What the invasions did was show other nation-states and actors that we are not afraid of direct confrontation. We will, in fact, dismantle their conventional forces rather quickly. No powerful army in history has dealt well with insurgency. We, fortunately, are more adaptable than our predecessors, and are improving our tactics, techniques and procedures daily. I say thank God we used our conventional forces. Woe be it to the world when somebody finally does use a nuke against another country again.


Likewise I reiterate my initial idea that China does not need some superior military. Economic and political allies reinforce that. And methinks that would be a tough country to invade as well.

I agree with you. China does not need a superior military. The fact that they are progressing in that direction on a daily basis should be some cause for alarm. When they are both numerically and technologically superior to us from a military standpoint, we won't have time to be alarmed. And you are very correct about invading China. It is nearly impossible, much like invading the United States.