China - competitor, or opponent?


#41

Your figures appear to be way out.

In terms of industrial production, the US is behind China but not by much: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-countries-with-the-highest-industrial-outputs-in-the-world.html

In the military side, your global research site puts the number of men fit for service in China about 600 million, whereas in the US it is 100 million. It wouldn’t just be the US against china, if there was a war, Europe and Japan would be on the US side I expect.

Neither side can afford a war


#42

The the Chinese have their own original thoughts? Please tell me how much time you spent in actual China itself? The common Chinese citizen can’t even walk a straight line without having to look at their phone first.

They are not capable of having original thoughts, and when I mean they have stolen everything, I mean everything. They have even stolen our songs, our culture and trying to replicate things we 20 years ago.

No one is underestimating the Chinese, in fact after spending New Years in Asia and watching the New Years celebration that was broadcasted from Beijing last night, one thing is for certain, they are gearing up for war! Do you want the communist to take over the world? Fuck that! I know my rights and that doesn’t mean that I will finance my own demise! Maybe that is what you want! Good luck with that! Fuck China!


#43

Military industrial production, not just production overall.

We can’t redicate existing production lines of civilian goods to military production today like we did in the 40’s. Hell, we’re having to import steel for industrial production because we’ve killed off much of our own primary extraction, ore processing and slab metals production.

If not for foreign orders we wouldn’t even be producing tanks and heavy armored vehicles anymore.

As for the rail guns… .

The US has working prototype rail guns, all that has been delayed is their deployment.


#44

Several thousand years of world and Chinese history tells us otherwise.

In just a few decades they have created a modern industrial and technological economy which took a hell of a lot of thought and planning by the Chinese along an amazing understanding of solving logistical problems.


#45

China would have a lot more to lose than the US if such a war broke out.


#46

Disagree! It was no different than what the US did. Tell me how much time have you spent living in actual China? Are you fluent in Mandarin? I would imagine you are sitting at home behind some computer pontificating about China’s history, when others like me are actually here and seeing it and experiencing it first hand. So your response means nothing to me!


#47

Fit for service would be in relation to physically fit for service. 71% of Americans of eligible age aren’t fit for service.

China has 619,000,000 fit for service, the US has just 120,000,00 so I’m not sure what you’re looking at. That’s about 5.5 times what the us has available and they have ten times as many people coming of military age each year that we do.

Try Nation Master for another comparison.

BTW, back to rail guns for a minute.

Anytime we want to I’m sure we can buy both ground and ship mounted models already in production and being deployed by the Israelis.


#48

You’re living in the present, not history.


#49

Not really, they do however have much more to lose by threatening war with the US. They are so dependent on us economically that the threat of cutting off trade currently that we can restrain them by threatening trade embargoes.

If however we go to war the equation changes dramatically.


#50

I do not live in the past! The present is the only equation that matters! You have a very nasty habit of ignoring context in the larger picture and rather you chose to fixate on a one dimensional argument in this discussion!


#51

Its not just the US that they are dependent on, 60% of their economy is dependent on outside resources, and they would not be able to sustain a long sustained war with the US and it’s allies. Economy is the most important factor to consider, and with all the variables considered, China would lose big time! With one stroke of a pen many Chinese nationals living in the US including commercial interests would mean Billions of dollars in loses.


#52

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-02-04/huawei-sting-offers-rare-glimpse-of-u-s-targeting-chinese-giant


#53

Good lord man, that’s ridiculous.

China will have gone from about the 30th largest econonmy in a span of only four decades to become the worlds largest economy ten years from now.

They did it without a war too.

Look, you may hate the Chinese for whatever reasons but quit making up stupid stuff that is flatly untrue and moving the goal posts by dragging them behind a dragster.


#54

None of which matters in the long term. If China defeated and conquered the US they’d not only have all of our business they’d have all of our resources at their disposal which would secure them the position as the world’s largest economy for at least a century or more.


#55

You don’t know what the fuck talking about, and it has nothing to do with me hating the Chinese, so stop using false equivalencies and cherry picking my statements which you seem to do all time here to prop up your stupid arguments!


#56

Yeah? Tell me how they are going to do that Einstein if they go to war with the US? They are going to invade the US? Now who is talking stupid here?


#57

+1 for using TRL!


#58

I didn’t cherry pick anything, I quoted your posts in their entirety.

I know exactly what I’m talking about and your histrionic replies show that you don’t and even you realize it.


#59

Once they develop their expeditionary capability they can do just that very easily, particularly via the Central American/Mexican route.

Who now owns and operates the Panama Canal?


#60

Then you are doomed.

The past informs us, it points out things we missed and had to painfully make up for.

There is a reason the War College exists.
There is a reason Top Gun was invented

I have never known a military officer above Lt. Col that was not a student of history.