China would win war with USA

[Derrell M]

The overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China. It has been an assessment relayed to U.S. government officials over the past few months by countries such as Australia, Japan and South Korea. This comes as President Bush wraps up a visit to Asia, in which he sought to strengthen U.S. ties with key allies in the region.

Most Asian officials have expressed their views privately. Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara has gone public, warning that the United States would lose any war with China.

"In any case, if tension between the United States and China heightens, if each side pulls the trigger, though it may not be stretched to nuclear weapons, and the wider hostilities expand, I believe America cannot win as it has a civic society that must adhere to the value of respecting lives," Mr. Ishihara said in an address to the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Mr. Ishihara said U.S. ground forces, with the exception of the Marines, are "extremely incompetent" and would be unable to stem a Chinese conventional attack. Indeed, he asserted that China would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons against Asian and American cities—even at the risk of a massive U.S. retaliation.

The governor said the U.S. military could not counter a wave of millions of Chinese soldiers prepared to die in any onslaught against U.S. forces. After 2,000 casualties, he said, the U.S. military would be forced to withdraw.

"Therefore, we need to consider other means to counter China," he said. "The step we should be taking against China, I believe, is economic containment."

Officials acknowledge that Mr. Ishihara's views reflect the widespread skepticism of U.S. military capabilities in such countries as Australia, India, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. They said the U.S.-led war in Iraq has pointed to the American weakness in low-tech warfare.

"When we can't even control parts of Anbar, they get the message loud and clear," an official said, referring to the flashpoint province in western Iraq.

As a result, Asian allies of the United States are quietly preparing to bolster their militaries independent of Washington. So far, the Bush administration has been strongly opposed to an indigenous Japanese defense capability, fearing it would lead to the expulsion of the U.S. military presence from that country.

On Nov. 16, Mr. Bush met with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. The two leaders discussed the realignment of the U.S. military presence in Japan and Tokyo's troop deployment in Iraq.

During his visit to Washington in early November, Mr. Ishihara met senior U.S. defense officials. They included talks with U.S. Defense Deputy Undersecretary for Asian and Pacific Affairs Richard Lawless to discuss the realignment of the U.S. military presence in Japan.

For his part, Mr. Ishihara does not see China as evolving into a stable democracy with free elections.

"I believe such predictions are totally wrong," Mr. Ishihara said.

http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/slasheastasia_1.htm

[Dr. Shane]

What it translates to is if China wants to take Tawain, the US isn't going to do anything about it. As China's economy grows, it is going to become less dependant on the US to buy its exports too.

[bevin]

I agree, Shane

/Bevin

[Derrell]

Quote:

---

Mr. Ishihara said U.S. ground forces, with the exception of the Marines, are "extremely incompetent" and would be unable to stem a Chinese conventional attack. Indeed, he asserted that China would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons against Asian and American cities—even at the risk of a massive U.S. retaliation.

---

If China used nukes on other Asians but took care to avoid us our congress and all of the spineless wimps would say that its not our war because they arn't nuking us and we would probably just stay out of it.

Quote:

---

The governor said the U.S. military could not counter a wave of millions of Chinese soldiers prepared to die in any onslaught against U.S. forces. After 2,000 casualties, he said, the U.S. military would be forced to withdraw.

---

Yep, that too.

Quote:

---

I believe America cannot win as it has a civic society that must adhere to the value of respecting lives

---

Thats really the key. in WW2 we carpet bombed and killed countless civilians but now we dont do that and the Chinese do.

[Dr. Shane]

The US could not win a war with China if fought on forgien soil. If China were to come accross the ocean and invade the US it is not so clear. The US is a population with an armed civilian population. If invaded by an enemy assault rifles could become available within a few months to any and all civilians in unoccupied areas. I don't want to say China couldn't defeat the US but it would be by no means a sure thing. It never is for an invading army.

[CyberGuy]

In a land war yes that assesment is possibly correct but China does not have a large blue water navy and they have NO aircraft carriers. Their navy is basically designed to defend their coast. The do not have the means YET of taking on the US Navy out in the ocean in an open conflict. That means that China has no means of invading across the ocean yet. They hope to intimidate Tawain but do not have the means of invading it. If they could they would have by now. They certainly cannot invade the US. We would trounce their Navy at this time. We have 10 aircraft carrier battlegroups and China has NO Aircraft carriers. What makes you think China would stand a chance out in the open ocean against the US.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

What makes you think China would stand a chance out in the open ocean against the US.

---

American's still haven't learnt the lesson of WW-II - nobody wins wars.

China has nothing to gain from a war against the continental USA - and in all its history has not waged a major war of aggression. The USA, on the other hand, has had three kinds of wars

(a) wars of expansion - against England, France, and Spain

( wars to protect its trading influence - against Japan, various Arab countries, and in Central and South America

© wars against political concepts - WW-I, WW-II, the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam

From the Chinese point of view, the important thing is they are finally getting enough military power that the USA can no longer push them around easily.

To understand Asia, you have to know about

(a) The Opium Wars

(Commodore Perry

Once you understand these two events, you will see why they fear us a lot more than we fear them

/Bevin

[CyberGuy]

Quote:

---

China has nothing to gain from a war against the continental USA - and in all its history has not waged a major war of aggression. The USA, on the other hand, has had three kinds of wars

---

Then you have not learned your history. China invaded and conquered Tibet. They have built small airbases in sandy atols around the philipines much like what Japan did prior to WW II.

Chinese Generals have said all they have to do is wait 20 years and the US will be so Bankrupt they will not be able to stop them. Stop them from what? Can't you see it. We will be involved in a war with China within the next 20 years most likely.

Also remember China's invasion of Vietnam in the 1980's It was over a border dispute. Vietnam fresh with all that captured US military equipment trounced China and China had to withdrawl.

So do not say to me China has never waged a war of agression. They have and all in the past 50 years.

[Bravus]

I suspect that China can defeat the US (in the sense of making it no longer the sole superpower, and perhaps not even a superpower) in the marketplace. And then why bother with a hollow military victory that would be costly in yuan and lives? Of course, the fact that US trade deficits and debts to China are increasing at a dramatic rate is just setting the country up for a fall sooner. Already if China decided to call in all its markers the US economy would implode... unless the US decided to go to war with China.

"We live in interesting times..."

[Neil D]

US war with China.....

that's a tough one...

On shear numbers alone, China would win...hands down, no contest...

But in technology, I question the ability of China to match the US. If China were to overhelm us by numbers, I think we would respond with the nuclear weapons. And it depends upon where China attacks the US....if Tiwan, I think that we would let that go...

If they attacked Hawaii, that might be something a bit different.

As to air superiority, I think that China has some 'hotshots' who are more air heads and because of that, I think our flyboys could take them out. Remember our damaged aircraft that had to fly to china due to some hotshot who ended up coliding with our aircraft back in the mid 90s?

If all thier airboys are like those jerks, we can take them easily.

[CyberGuy]

Quote:

---

But in technology, I question the ability of China to match the US. If China were to overhelm us by numbers, I think we would respond with the nuclear weapons. And it depends upon where China attacks the US....if Tiwan, I think that we would let that go...

If they attacked Hawaii, that might be something a bit different.

As to air superiority, I think that China has some 'hotshots' who are more air heads and because of that, I think our flyboys could take them out. Remember our damaged aircraft that had to fly to china due to some hotshot who ended up coliding with our aircraft back in the mid 90s?

If all thier airboys are like those jerks, we can take them easily.

---

We have better fighters than China has. In a sea war China would lose as we have control of the seas with our aircraft carriers. A war in Korea would be bad if China joins in. in the Korean war China lost one million men while the US lost 50,000. Now that means China lost 20 men to evey one we lost in that war. China has two million in their armed forces right now. They cannot afford those kinds of losses. China does not have a large standing army. While it is true they have three times our population we have three times the GNP and industrial might right now. True this may change in 20 years but that is the way it stands right now. We also have the technology edge right now. China is watching the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and seeing how our smart missiles jam and take out the soviet battaries so easily. Chinese technology is built on the soviet technology.

So in the short run the US would beat the Chinese at Sea but in a land war unless we are prepared for heavy casualties we cannot win a land war. We can prevent China from reaching Japan and Australia and the Phlipines. We have more nukes and subs than China has. We have stealth aircraft and China does not.

[Ron Lambert]

Chinese soldiers have never shown themselves to be elite forces. They were slaughtered during the Korean War, they were even defeated by the Vietnamese when the Chinese invaded Vietnam about a decade ago.

How anyone in the world could call the U.S. Army incompetent is a mystery, after the way they acquitted themselves in the invasion of Iraq. The Marines only sent in one division.

This is just propaganda, trying to make the Chinese appear stronger than they really are militarily. Twenty or thirty 20 megaton strategic nuclear warheads would sterilize the entire landmass of China. That is fact number one to begin with. America has the nukes, and several different means to deliver them from any launch site on earth, land or sea.

And then, if for some reason the U.S. should decide it has to conquer China with ground troops, I would give 100,000 U.S. ground troups at least a 4-1 military advantage over one million Chinese soldiers. When you consider the superior training and weapons technology possessed by the most ordinary U.S. soldier, the battle odds could really be higher than that.

In a conventional war with China, the U.S. would first completely wipe out the Chinese Air Force--probably without losing a single U.S. warplane--and would also sink every Chinese naval vessel--including all their submarines--within the first six hours. Then with total control of the sea and complete air superiority, the Chinese ground forces would be like ducks in a rain barrel.

Americans really do not want to slaughter millions of Chinese soldiers. But it is foolish for anyone to claim that American military forces could not do so. Let us hope that the Chinese leaders are not so stupid as to be deceived by their own propaganda, and base their plans on such erroneous assessments.

Almost everybody thought the old Soviet Union was a real military powerhouse, and might even walk right over NATO if it came to blows. But then the reality of how really weak the Soviet Union and its vaunted military were finally began to be seen in Afghanistan, and was fully exposed when the Soviet Union collapsed without hardly a shot being fired. Now many military analysts will tell you that the main line Soviet battle tanks were death traps for the crews, and would not have stood a chance against American tanks.

Let's not make the same defeatist mistake with China, which in most respects is still a very backward and poor country. China is making great strides in attempting to develop and grow its economy. We should be glad for this, because the more the Chinese have, the more they will realize they have to lose, and this will make them less ready to be reckless and unnecessarily confrontational with America.

Historically, there have been strong ties between America and China, more so than China has had with any other nation. We could conceivably even become allies, once the last of the tyrannical communist diehards are finally gone.

[CyberGuy]

I read this one article in a news magazine of a man who worked with the FBI and CIA to track Chinese internet Spies who were breaking through the firewalls of major corporations and stealing major corporations secrets. They were interested in military secrets mostly. Companies that built military hardware etc. After working for the FBI for several years he was cut loose when the FBI were informed that their agent was breaking US law by breaking into Chinese computers even though he was only tracking their spies.

However the US is now aware of chinese activity. My own firewall I get hits on my firewall from Chinese universities all the time. I hope they do not get through. After I set up my firewall I set up zonealarm and I had no more hits on my internal zonealarm firewall. So I guess they are not getting through.

It helps to have a rotating IP address as well.

My Point is the chinese are stealing US Military secrets right now.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Twenty or thirty 20 megaton strategic nuclear warheads would sterilize the entire landmass of China. That is fact number one to begin with. America has the nukes, and several different means to deliver them from any launch site on earth, land or sea.

---

After Lop Nor, and putting someone into orbit - I am sure the Chinese could return the 'favor'.

Quote:

---

China is making great strides in attempting to develop and grow its economy. We should be glad for this, because the more the Chinese have, the more they will realize they have to lose, and this will make them less ready to be reckless and unnecessarily confrontational with America.

---

Agreed - and the argument also goes the other way - the American's have a lot, and it behoves them not to seek a confrontation with China either

/Bevin

[bevin]

Quote:

---

My Point is the chinese are stealing US Military secrets right now.

---

You miss the point. I have worked with Russian and Chinese computer engineers - h/w and s/w. In many ways they are a match for their US equivalents.

My employer - Intel - does significant h/w and s/w development in China, because their academic levels are excellent.

The Chinese share tech and info with Russia. I have visited the Russian Nuclear Museum in Sarov (the Russian Los Alamos), while visiting the s/w team in that city that I manage. Yes - I had to get special security clearance to be in the city at all, and we had 'minders' attached to our party the whole time we were there...

The main stream latest Intel CPU was not designed in the USA - it was designed in Israel. The chips that go into cell-phones are designed in China and use s/w developed in Germany.

The point you are missing is that Russia, China, India, and many other countries are all at much the same level academically - the USA does NOT have a huge raft of technology or manufacturing secrets to steal any more.

/Bevin

ps: Stealth technology was based on a RUSSIAN mathematical break-through...

[Derrell M]

In the event that war were to occur, the US could most likely disable the Chinese Naval fleet and gain air superiority over the ocean and most of Asia rather quickly. However, I seriously doubt that sending ground troops into China would work out for us unless we were willing to inflinct massive civilian casualties, probably in the millions, without any hesitation or remorse. The entire world knows that the US no longer has the stomache for that sort of thing, but they also know the Chinese do. In a ground war, I have no doubt that the Chinese would, without hesitation, kill a thousand of their civilians to get to one American GI. They have many large population centers in which to base operations.

[CyberGuy]

I think the US would strive to gain control of the Oceans and air right off and then batter the land forces from the air.

If we were to fight China it would be in Korea possibly. Tawain would be the most likely flash point in the near future. China is striving to gain technology as fast as possible. That is why they are striveing to gain space technology as fast as possible. With Space technology comes missile technology and missile guidance technology.

Also oil could be a flash point. It is said that China will consume 1/3 of the total world oil consumption within 20 years and their GNP could equal or surpass the US GNP at their current growth.

[Bravus]

The chest beating is tiring me. Point is, if this war ever took place, millions of humans would die. How 'bout we just pray it doesn't happen.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Bravus said:

How 'bout we just pray it doesn't happen.

---

If you guys are concerned about the future, don't worry about China. Worry about the USA....From the Bible perspective it is the USA that will "force"..."the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed." [Rev 13:12]

[dennisinchina]

Living here in China gives me a local perspective. As Bravus said, all this talk of war with China isnt necesary. as the Bible tells us the US will be the dominent enforcer of evil in end time scenario. Probably all the world's armys will want in on the action in Armageddon. As SDAs we should be talking the love of Christ, not how strong our country is. One to one friendship is the best to get countries to avoid war. One naval officer told me our friendship changed his view of Americian he had learned in his navy training and would respond if he saw end time events the way I described to him. Another foreign teacher here a few years ago became friends with a former jet pilot he may have had a 'dogfight" with in Korea. Dont see how the world will last much longer and allow time for just "odinarry' wars outside of Armageddon, but I wont be surprised at anything that happen from now on, so much has happened the last few year and with the gospel pretty will covering the world. Dennis in China

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Worry about the USA....From the Bible perspective it is the USA

---

Yeah, right.

There is NO mention of the USA in the Bible. You have to be blatantly biased in your reading to see this particular SDA ink-blot.

/Bevin

[Ron Lambert]

Granted, Bevin, that it is an over-simplication to say that the U.S. is the second beast in Revelation 13; nonetheless the U.S. will certainly be involved, lending its power to the church and state amalgamation that will be able to cause all the world to worship the image to the first beast.

If you dissent from that view as well, then what do you believe the second beast of Revelation 13 represents?

[Derrell M]

I've read the Bible cover to cover and somehow missed the part that says the United States of America will be the Beast's enforcer, or anything like that. Where does the Bible say that?

by the way, war between the US and China might an interesting Tom Clancy like idea, but at this point I think it is far more likely that we are going down the path toward being allies, than wartime opponents.

[Ron Lambert]

Friend, Bible prophecy often does not say things explicitly, outright; but does indicate things implicitly. The symbology does have a definite meaning when we use sound methods of exegesis to get out of the text what the text says, and allow the Bible to define its own terms and symbols (by comparing all other instances in the Bible where those terms and symbols are used).

In Bible prophecy, terms like "waters" or "sea" represents "peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues." (Rev. 17:15) As we consider the symbology of the beasts in Daniel 7 & 8 (which we are told represent kingdoms that arise) we see that the beasts in Daniel's outline of world history arose in the densely populated areas of the world that we call "the Old World," in other words, the Middle East and Europe. The first beast of Revelation 13 has the same origin.

In contrast, what then must it mean logically for the second beast to arise not out of the sea, but out of the earth? Does this not connote the "New World," where America in particular arose out of what had been sparsely populated wilderness?

Notice also that the second beast of Rev. 13 has two lamb-like horns. Horns in Bible prophecy connote strength of a nation, and the lamb is a symbol of Christ. Thus the second beast arises appearing to be Christian in the principles upon which it is founded. But at some point it begins speaking like Satan (the dragon).

Notice that there are two horns. America is a government of checks and balances. Uniquely in the world's democracies, America has two major political parties which wield power. And also notice that the horns are not crowned, like the horns of the first beast, indicating that the power of the nation does not come from royalty. America is a democracy, with no kings.

SDAs have long been quite settled on this point of interpretation. But as I indicated in my previous post, it overly simplifies things to say the second beast is the USA. Since the first beast is a union of church and state, so also the second beast must be a union of church and state. The two horns also connote this--that the power of the beast comes from two sources: the secular state and the churches, joined together in an improper union that Revelation characterizes as adultery and fornication.

Thus I believe that the second beast has not truly appeared yet; though the USA will be a part of it, and it is the power of the USA that will be able to make all nations form their own image to the first beast and thus worship the first beast.

[Derrell M]

A plausible theory and certainly drawn from a well thought out interpretation by some intelligent people who invested alot of study into it. I guess time will tell.