China, The Red Threat

China, The Red Threat
By IDARNG_Loki

This is a look into what communist China has been doing and what it means to us. I'm here to put some of the pieces together for you.

China has basically been Communist since the civil war it had in the mid 1900s. They have been a pain in our a$$ since then. Recently, as you've probably seen in the news, China fired a missile into space where it destroyed one of it's weather satellites.

This space weapon has a few dimensions to it. Is this supposed a distraction off of North Korea? Highly doubtful. IMO, China is flexing it's military muscles to remind the world it's still a power. Should we pass a space weapons ban? Would China honor it? I honestly don't know, but I seriously doubt it. If this escalates though I worry we won't be able to react in time or with the right numbers (I'll explain in due time). Also remember a certain news article a year or two ago that released information on all American satellites (civilians and military alike). Now if China can shoot down satellites and he has a pretty good idea where our classified and spy satellites, how are we to protect our assets and still keep up our watchful eye. It's really hard to see with a black-eye.

China has taken US officials and analysts by surprise by building their military with such expedience. China is trying to catch up to America to become a competitor in the super powers. They have such a massive ground force that it would be foolish of us to try conventional ground warfare with them. They have been building up their naval assets, but nothing to rival us; their airforce is also in the same boat as their navy. But why a build-up now? It's the perfect time obviously. The one power that can hold back China, the US, is spread throughout the world combatting terrorists and not paying too much attention to them. While we are spread out it is possible that China will try to take Taiwan. Even if they don't get it diplomatically they can get it through other means. Send some Chines Special Operations Forces and cause unrest in the area. Even if they do an all out invasion of the island we wouldn't have time to react in time; the only solution would be either compromise (f*** that) or for the US to fight back.

Why do we want Taiwan though? They don't bring us anything really special. Yeah, their economy kicks butt, but still why? It's simple...democracy. They are a shining example of democracy in a very red area. Is it worth it to fight for such a small asset? IDK, but only time will tell.

Now all the time they are doing this, they are also hindering us in our WOT. Everytime the US tries to get something passed in the UN the Chinese strong arm us and go against with all their will. Sometimes it doesn't make sense, but I think China does it just to weigh us down.

Now if we did go to war with China would it be on our shores or theirs? Most likely it will be over on theirs or near theirs. In this modern time we have moved away from conventional warfare and into a more guerilla style, but with China it won't be much of either; it will be a deluted mix. If I were in charge I would send my naval fleet to protect Japan and any approach into the Pacific from China's naval assets. Then I would send the Air Force in and bomb the holy dog crap out of the country and certain valuable military and government targets. Then I would probably send in a heavy (armoured) ground force. At first it would be somewhat conventional. Once we had a foot-hold though and the Chinese military surpressed it would transition into a guerilla style. This scares me because China's landscape is anything, but kind. The insurgents and terrorists would have so many advantages over us it's not even funny; homefield advantage. And I did say "insurgents and terrorists" because we wouldn't just be fighting Chinese nationals (insurgents), but transnational fighters (terrorists) also. You have North Korea right next door, anti-American Jihadi's in the Indonesia/Phillipines islands, Iran would probably send fighters over, Islamofascists would flock to China, and all the while we would find out where Russia really stands (probably against us, but would wear the mask of "neutrality" while sending a force to support China).

China doesn't bode well in my mind. Whether they attack today, tomorrow, or 10-years they will be America's, and freedom's, next great battle and struggle.

Also see my article on "Infanticide in China", coming soon to a Hot Topic near you.

SOURCES:
Search engines:
- China, military build-up
- China, missile, satellite
- Taiwan conflict, China

Nicely done Loki.

Buzzy wrote:Nicely done Loki.

Thanks. I've been wanting to post that for a few days. Before I was wanting to post something that was good. This seems like something we should look at, but also not to forget the other stuff. I'm going to be putting together more of my research articles. Some will be on Islamicfascism, immigration, and our new Democrat-ruled Congress.

I'm not sure this is other hot topics material.... this is more world or american politics or something..

Anyways, I voted no, because I don't believe that any more major conflicts will EVER occur because of what history has shown us, and because of the incredible firepower and destructive capabilities of modern weapons. You might enter a cold war with China, you might fight over parts of Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Hell, if things really turn sour, you'll embargo their asses and try making all of your companies to move to other countries.

Although they are a serious contender and will eat away at your power until they equal and eventually surpass it (all these assumptions are based on the current state of things, if you decide to go all out war and conquer this and that country, we're in a whole different ball park), I don't think you'll enter into any serious conflicts with them because it will get too messy and you have too much to lose if you do.

You won't enter into a major conflict with China because

1. China is a major exporter to your country, your companies are making a fortune in China and some of that money is indirectly (various forms of taxes and duties) flowing into state coffers.

2. China is huge, you will never be able to conquer it, and because it's huge the gov't can always move around the country until they force you out, assuming you decide to invade (what the Taliban is doing in a country 6x or 7x smaller with 10x less people).

3. No matter what you say, I strongly believe, and hope, that nobody's ever gonna truly go nuclear, because if they do, the consequences will be dire.

4. Although you might engage in indirect military conflicts with China - like sponsoring Afghanistan vs. the USSR, or nazis vs. ruskies in the Spanish Civil War, you'll never enter a direct conflict for the reasons cited above.

5. Assuming all of the above is correct, it is safe to re-state that China will ebb away at your power (along with other world players) until you lose the #1 spot and become one of the world's major players and not THE world player.

popov, you're forgetting about two very likely occurances that would render your arguments moot:

1) Another American Civil War
2) A 'beer presidency (or more likely, a Constitution Party presidency, which is becoming more likely as the GOP self destructs.)

Popov wrote:I'm not sure this is other hot topics material.... this is more world or american politics or something.

I was meaning it as a Hot Topic because it's something that really isn't politics driven, but deserves some attention.

Popov wrote:1. China is a major exporter to your country, your companies are making a fortune in China and some of that money is indirectly (various forms of taxes and duties) flowing into state coffers.

That exportation connection would become null and void if they went from peer (someone who can challenge the US in many dimensions at a global level) to threat (someone who has made threats and has the intention to cause harm to the US and it's territories) and threat to enemy (someone who acts on the threats and intentions).

There's one other thing to consider.

Civil war will probably break China apart into three or four Chinas before we would ever need to fight a war against the People's Republic. Despite the nationalist rhetoric that we here from China's leaders, China is very divided along ethnic, social class, and ideological lines. No matter what it does, a civil administration of 50 million people simply can't bind together and control 1.3 billion people if those people don't want to be bound and controlled.

China will probably have a muslim rebellion within the next 25 years. That's short term in Chinese thinking.

iluvfreebeer wrote:China will probably have a muslim rebellion within the next 25 years. That's short term in Chinese thinking.

But which is deadlier: Commie Chinese or Islamic Chinese?

Dead chinese muslims and dead chinese communists constitute the same threat, savvy?

China may well be a up and coming superpower and it's manufacturing growth has been nothing short of impressive but China is nothing but a house of cards filled with smoke and mirrors.

Due to their lack of oil and other raw materials China is on the road to territorial expansion and their recent world class refit of its military and weapons systems would tend to show their interest in that direction.

Even if they chose to stay as a manufacturing nation China would find themselves in a mess. They can turn out goods cheaply only because of cheap labor costs but to keep these costs low they will have to remain a third world nation in individual citizen earnings and consumer power. How long does anyone expect the Chinese citizen to build products for the west before they rise up and demand decent wages, living conditions etc. and where will they find cheap labor to utilize when their own workers outprice themselves in the market?

So we have a country, a huge country, that needs raw materials and cheap labor with an artificially inflated currency and internal pressures from rising expectations of its own citizens whose westernized expectations cannot be met.

China is on the road to military expansion just as Japan was when they invaded China in the 1930's and they will look north into what was previously the territory of the USSR, into Siberia. No other place makes any sense. SE Asia, the Middle East, South America? Centuries of disputed borders with Russia / USSR / and once again Russia combined with the fact that much of Siberia is already ethnic Chinese and not white Russian plus lots of wood, iron ore, copper, zinc, oil multiplied by the fact that the ethnic Chinese in Siberia do not yet have economic expectations (cheap labor)and are far from westernized equal a path to economic prosperity in the eyes of the Chinese leadership.

China's recent prosperity is at the end of it's leash. Globalization gave them some power and wealth but globalization doesn't give poor nations true prosperity it enslaves them to a world where they must continue to provide cheap labor or watch the global corporations move to where they can find cheaper labor and manufacturing costs. Chinese goods are already getting more expensive to make and ship than some other nations, high oil prices are hurting China's growth much more than some other nations also.

Within the next decade (maybe much sooner) I predict China will attempt to expand northward. Will Russia contest their land grab? Will the US side with one or another?

Here is a paper written on Unrest in China
http://carnegieendowment.org/files/Keidel_Social_Unrest.pdf

regarding China's aims in Siberia
http://historysend.blogspot.com/2004/05/colonization.html

I believe Tom Clancy predicted much of this several novels ago.

iluvfreebeer wrote:Dead chinese muslims and dead chinese communists constitute the same threat, savvy?

Touche

China has a long long way to go before it can sustain itself. There will be a Civil war in China, as there will probably be another one here in the US.

When the political divides that we are seeing in both countries keep getting deeper then war is the only outcome. Middle of the road doesn't really exist, it is only filled with those who are afraid to let others know what they really think.

Actually I don't think that China will suffer a civil war because they will pursue their expansionist policies to prevent one. I'll borrow the concept that Russia will sell Siberia to the Chinese from Mark Steyn (who borrowed the concept from Glen Willard). Maybe the US will sell Alaska to China too, or exchange it for all those debts of ours they are holding. Its not like the Democrats are ever going to let us use the resources up there.

Can we sell Massacheusetts and Louisianna?

I'm afraid we'd need permission from Mexico to sell Califonia, Arizona or Texas.

Buzzy wrote:Actually I don't think that China will suffer a civil war because they will pursue their expansionist policies to prevent one. I'll borrow the concept that Russia will sell Siberia to the Chinese from Mark Steyn (who borrowed the concept from Glen Willard). Maybe the US will sell Alaska to China too, or exchange it for all those debts of ours they are holding. Its not like the Democrats are ever going to let us use the resources up there.

Hopefully that won't happen... if China gets resources they will be a great danger. They are not going to change their creed w/o civil war. The powers that be are not going to release their control over the people without being forced to. Expansionism may delay a civil revolt, but not stop it.

Good points OG, it may delay a civil war in China but don't paint the Chinese leaders as red these days. Mao has been purged from their history books and collectivism isn't so much a social program these days as a capitalistic strategy. They have seriously given up the "religion" of Mao for the "religion" of the almighty buck and they would be extremely dangerous if they get sufficent resources to become a consumer nation instead of a third world manufacturing center for consumer nations.

Buzzy wrote:Maybe the US will sell Alaska to China too, or exchange it for all those debts of ours they are holding. Its not like the Democrats are ever going to let us use the resources up there.

But we shouldn't hand those resources to the Russians.

iluvfreebeer wrote:popov, you're forgetting about two very likely occurances that would render your arguments moot:

1) Another American Civil War
2) A 'beer presidency (or more likely, a Constitution Party presidency, which is becoming more likely as the GOP self destructs.)

i think that i made it clear that all of my conclusions are in a "as it stands" political situation - if there is radical change in Washington or with any of the other major players obviously these conclusions could be void

Joahob wrote:There's one other thing to consider.

Civil war will probably break China apart into three or four Chinas before we would ever need to fight a war against the People's Republic. Despite the nationalist rhetoric that we here from China's leaders, China is very divided along ethnic, social class, and ideological lines. No matter what it does, a civil administration of 50 million people simply can't bind together and control 1.3 billion people if those people don't want to be bound and controlled.

while i won't reject the possibility of revolution / internal strife there are several key points that nullify this possibility, once again, in an "as it stands" political climate

- the majority of civil wars, revolutions etc are driven and funded by middle class leaders and often, but not always foreign interest - as long as the gov't keeps the middle class happy, and, from what i know, they do, there is little or no chance of any rebellious activity - strife organized by the people themselves or by students or whatnot rarely lead to any real results and is easily contained and eliminated. the people, unless incredibly oppressed will continue to do the day to day - as long as they have food and shelter and some hope of improvement, entertainment - the basics - they won't rebel, unless they are stimulated by activists but these are inexistent due to a mix of what ive already said about the middle class and also due to ongoing strict gov't control

concerning the siberia / russia debate

i do believe that China would be more than happy to get a chunk of siberia. BUT - at this point in time they won't enter a military conflict with russia and russia is, thank god, no longer in the anarchical yeltsin years so there is no way they will sell any land to big red

by the time china gets to a point where they are strong enough to become aggressive and expansionist, if all goes well, russia will be back on its feet. there's a lot of promise in the country, but, seeing as democracy is not an option our future depends on the capabilities of our next leader - if economic development can continue and more money can be poured into the infrastructure (i seriously doubt that the kremlin will continue feeding its stability fund eternally...)

The World Bank estimated that the country's oil "stability fund" - currently worth more than $60bn - could grow to $2.3 trillion by 2030, meaning that Russia's 140 million citizens could potentially enjoy a $16,500 windfall each. A sum of $2.3 trillion would be equivalent to 43 per cent of Russia's projected gross domestic product for that year, and inter-est alone on the amount could yield $800bn.

so if you consider the above - there is no need in the near future to sell siberia - and if, everything continues to go as expected, china will need to start expanding very soon - i believe that like america they will simply gobble up small nations with a mixture of military intervention and heavy financial investment - my guess is that africa will become for them what south america was to you for a while

major military conflicts are a thing of the past - in the contemporary world the major players won't take the risk of direct confrontation - my view : expect to see plenty of petty squabbles over this or that developing country but nothing major - like i predicted in the first post - im guessing america is going to leave center stage quietly, not with a major conflict or something

Popov wrote:- i believe that like america they will simply gobble up small nations with a mixture of military intervention and heavy financial investment - my guess is that africa will become for them what south america was to you for a while

major military conflicts are a thing of the past - in the contemporary world the major players won't take the risk of direct confrontation - my view : expect to see plenty of petty squabbles over this or that developing country but nothing major - like i predicted in the first post - im guessing america is going to leave center stage quietly, not with a major conflict or something

What small nations has America gobbled up? Name one.

Don't kid yourself that major military conflicts are a thing of the past. We are in a time of unprecidented peace - relatively speaking, the War in Iraq isn't a major operation, but things are heating up all over the world. Expect to see a major conflict arising due to the different ideologies that are coming to the forefront. America has a long way to go before it leaves center stage. The Chinese won't be able to remain center for any length of time due to the decades of repression. That will sever them internally. Russia is hungry to get back to it's "glory days", France is looking to have it's "glory day", Islamic presence all around the globe is growing at a frightening pace, don't expect that they will remain good little immigrants. Oil is so tied up in the world economy that the conflicts in the ME will keep escallating. The other countries around the globe are going to be in competition for those resources and prices will soar.

There are far too many things going on here, Popov. The European methods won't work. Talk does nothing in the ME.

Sadly, the day is coming when we will see armed conflict encompass the world again, only the stakes will be larger than ever before.

lol...it's been 9-months since I posted this, but things have changed.

Popov, pointed out that we wouldn't enter into a conflict with China because they are a major exporter, but with recent events over the past several months we see that it may, or should, change.



We also had the hacking of our defense systems, alleged to be by the Chinese. Now we are giving them the keys to our defenses. I don't like this one bit.

I'm not saying China is the only threat, but they are definately not our friend.