A Chinese's opinion

US vs. China?

Oh. Wonderful. Well, quite honestly, I (along with many others) hope this doesn't ever happen. But if it did, my money would be firmly on the United States. Why?

Well, look at it this way.

China's economy is growing rapidly, true, but this growth is both unsustainable and potentially devastating. Imagine the effects of a depression... China would be one of the worst hit nations because Europe and the US would slow trading to try to build up their own economies again. No one to import to means no more economic growth. The West could also gradually pull out of China and move some of its investment to neighbouring nations such as Indonesia, India and Singapore, thus slowing Chinese economic growth.

Also, to take on the US, China would have to invest significantly in its military (at the moment, it is primarily an economic power as opposed to a military power). Which would make neighbours such as Japan, South Korea and India (who aren't the best of friends with the Chinese, you will recall) nervous... arms race, anyone? Which, again, would be a major blow to the Chinese economy because its production would have to switch to military goods, which can't be exported to the West. India is in fact a useful counter-balance to China - they aren't fond of China, and their GDP and population is expected to exceed that of China's in the next few years.

Added to that is the fact that China is very reliant on imported raw materials and resources. So all the United States really has to do is to use its navy to prevent the oil tankers getting into Chinese ports and the Chinese economy is greatly hampered. And what's more, the Chinese Navy isn't good enough to break the blockade.

I suspect China knows how stupid a war with pretty much anyone would be. It has no solid allies (Well, except North Korea, but I wouldn't exactly call them the best allies in the world). It does have some relationships with neighbours such as Russia, but I think Russia would look out for its own interests rather than simply side with China (especially if China started a war).

So, in retrospect, I would argue that China's position is far more precarious than has been pointed out. If the war turned nuclear, China would almost certainly come out worst due to the superior systems the United States has and the sheer number of warheads America possesses.

And the very remark that America appears "too democratic" shows to me that you've completely misunderstood Western culture and government. Histories have shown that generally democracies come out on top - when the support of the people can be utilised effectively. In a dictatorship, the government forces the people to do what it wants, and hence they do it with little enthusiasm. In a democracy, the people push the government to do what they want and hence they do it with great enthusiasm - they have the people on their side. Perhaps if China was a true democracy you would appreciate why the US and other democracies are so proud of their system.

The liklihood of a war at present is unlikely, by the way. The Chinese Politburo apparently spends most of its time on internal issues and - let's face it - China has got a lot of problems. There's also the groups dotted around China which want independence (e.g. Tibet) to deal with - in a war, I suspect a lot of resources would need to be tied down to deal with areas such as that.

[edit on 20-11-2006 by Ste2652]

So, in retrospect, I would argue that China's position is far more precarious than has been pointed out. If the war turned nuclear, China would almost certainly come out worst due to the superior systems the United States has and the sheer number of warheads America possesses.

China is a unique enemy because it is the only major nuclear power in history that can be taken out by nukes without the U.S. having to suffer the same. The sheer quantity of warheads, as you say, allow the U.S. to literally wipe out China's nuclear arsenal without suffering retaliation. Quite unique, MAD is no longer an issue when going nuclear with China.

At the same time, that prospect needs to be taken with a few grains of salt. I'm quoting Vagabond here, but in order to conduct a nuclear strike on China without suffering retaliation, the execution has to be nearly perfect. China must not even come close to prepping any of its strategic forces for immediete launch. Its just not worth risking.

And the very remark that America appears "too democratic" shows to me that you've completely misunderstood Western culture and government. Histories have shown that generally democracies come out on top - when the support of the people can be utilised effectively. In a dictatorship, the government forces the people to do what it wants, and hence they do it with little enthusiasm. In a democracy, the people push the government to do what they want and hence they do it with great enthusiasm - they have the people on their side. Perhaps if China was a true democracy you would appreciate why the US and other democracies are so proud of their system.

An immature understanding of democracy. Democracy is about money. Without money, concepts like "government by the people" are just words. Without money, those words have no meaning.

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

So, in retrospect, I would argue that China's position is far more precarious than has been pointed out. If the war turned nuclear, China would almost certainly come out worst due to the superior systems the United States has and the sheer number of warheads America possesses.

China is a unique enemy because it is the only major nuclear power in history that can be taken out by nukes without the U.S. having to suffer the same. The sheer quantity of warheads, as you say, allow the U.S. to literally wipe out China's nuclear arsenal without suffering retaliation. Quite unique, MAD is no longer an issue when going nuclear with China.

At the same time, that prospect needs to be taken with a few grains of salt. I'm quoting Vagabond here, but in order to conduct a nuclear strike on China without suffering retaliation, the execution has to be nearly perfect. China must not even come close to prepping any of its strategic forces for immediete launch. Its just not worth risking.

And the very remark that America appears "too democratic" shows to me that you've completely misunderstood Western culture and government. Histories have shown that generally democracies come out on top - when the support of the people can be utilised effectively. In a dictatorship, the government forces the people to do what it wants, and hence they do it with little enthusiasm. In a democracy, the people push the government to do what they want and hence they do it with great enthusiasm - they have the people on their side. Perhaps if China was a true democracy you would appreciate why the US and other democracies are so proud of their system.

An immature understanding of democracy. Democracy is about money. Without money, concepts like "government by the people" are just words. Without money, those words have no meaning.

While I absolutely agree that MAD does not exist in regards to China and the bi-polar balance is an enigma. I disagree that if things were to really "heat-up" that Chinese Strategic objectives are even a concern. If they were, China would have seized the ROC a long time ago. Their current military posture is not capable of even a sea/air-lift capability of seizing an island shortly off their coast. If America were to make a move I am very sure it would be solely defensive on the part of China.

Although that is just as troubling because of the size of the PLA compounded by the People's Armed Militia.....imagine WWII Switzerland multiplied by the size of the Chinese population.

With so many military personel, china would suffer huge loss of life. Most of those military men and women are poorly trained, many malnutirtioned, and the vast majority use weapons that are out of date resulting in weapons that just dont work. So in other words, Chinas military population hurts china. Thats not good news for china. How would china feed all of these ppl during a time of war? Lets not forget that California is one of the biggest suppliers of rice to china. How would china get military supplys to these ppl? Ive been saying it for a while now. China is not a military powerhouse. And even has massive problems on the economic front that many look past. And with huge pollution problems diseases such as aids running rampant throughtout china, china has a long ways to go before it ever becomes a developed nation.

Originally posted by semperfoo
With so many military personel, china would suffer huge loss of life. Most of those military men and women are poorly trained, many malnutirtioned, and the vast majority use weapons that are out of date resulting in weapons that just dont work. So in other words, Chinas military population hurts china. Thats not good news for china. How would china feed all of these ppl during a time of war? Lets not forget that California is one of the biggest suppliers of rice to china. How would china get military supplys to these ppl? Ive been saying it for a while now. China is not a military powerhouse. And even has massive problems on the economic front that many look past. And with huge pollution problems diseases such as aids running rampant throughtout china, china has a long ways to go before it ever becomes a developed nation.

That is the sad part, Chinese military doctrine (despite current efforts to graduate from hard to software) is still similar to Mao's idea that no matter what you try and act upon China you will lose simply because we have more people to throw at you. Look at Korea. China thank God, is now realizing that in a modern battlefield it does not matter how many soldiers you throw at the problem, technology is so advanced now that it makes no difference. j

To echo semper, Chinese PLA doctrine is based on a strategy that would foolishly and unnecessarily result in countless unnecessary deaths. I am not declaring the US as Alpha Male, but I am saying that current PLA military doctrine is completely foolish.

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
An immature understanding of democracy. Democracy is about money. Without money, concepts like "government by the people" are just words. Without money, those words have no meaning.

Yes and no. Whilst your view is perhaps the cynical view, it does hold some truth. But you still must agree that, all in all, democracies tend to fare better in wars than dictatorships. For a variety of reasons, too - not just because they're democratic.

Originally posted by Baphomet79

That is the sad part, Chinese military doctrine (despite current efforts to graduate from hard to software) is still similar to Mao's idea that no matter what you try and act upon China you will lose simply because we have more people to throw at you. Look at Korea. China thank God, is now realizing that in a modern battlefield it does not matter how many soldiers you throw at the problem, technology is so advanced now that it makes no difference. j

To echo semper, Chinese PLA doctrine is based on a strategy that would foolishly and unnecessarily result in countless unnecessary deaths. I am not declaring the US as Alpha Male, but I am saying that current PLA military doctrine is completely foolish.

They need to get alot smaller to be a more tactiful effective force. That would also free up more money for research and developement. They are just to big for there own good right now.

Originally posted by semperfoo
They need to get alot smaller to be a more tactiful effective force. That would also free up more money for research and developement. They are just to big for there own good right now.

Indeed. The Soviets made this mistake also - they had to feed and equip millions of soldiers and keep up with the United States technology-wise (which had a considerably smaller military but was much better equipped). This was impossible to do, so great pressure was created on the Soviet economy. Which was one of the contributing factors to the Soviet Union's demise. So you see, quality seems to be better than quantity in many respects. Has been since the dawn of warfare.

I don't really think a war with China is inevitable. People after the Second World War thought that a war between the USA and USSR was inevitable, but it didn't happen (though, of course, it very nearly did on some occasions). And China enjoys a considerably better relationship with the US than the Soviets did at the end of WWII. So it's by no means inevitable, even though it can never be fully ruled out.

Perhaps your right that

A war to China should not be considered, it won’t happen.

However with the possible exception of Israel’s war on Lebanon every war in the history of mankind has always been between a democracy and a dictatorship or a dictatorship and a dictatorship. And even then Israel denies it’s at war with the Lebanon government (although whether it “covertly” is unusually debatable).

Therefore I wonder just how wise of us it is to assist you in your greatness. At the end of the day you’re a potential threat as long as you are undemocratic this is because democracies and dictatorships only seem to have good relations when dominance is clearly established.
However as the current situation is good, it would appear that your almost infinitely more of a threat in the future than the present. Hopefully (if or when) that situation arises technology will still enable a peaceful gold war situation. But by being powerful and undemocratic you are a threat, I hope change will come from within but I think wealth in abundance and modern technology (lacking in the 19th century) on your government’s oppressive sides; I kind of doubt it.

You’re certainly wrong about us being too democratic as it causes us to develop new technology and kill less smart people. However should technology fail us we can still agree to war as world war one and two show. People who involve themselves in politics are usually smart and (unlike a dictatorship) in a democracy they nearly always) are ideal citizens.
But I agree there are times when we have been “too democratic” and the Korean War was one of them. Pragmatically we should have used the nuclear bomb, and have gone on to invade China. Militarily it was also the perfect time for another war as the Soviet Union was still so much behind us.
However the people needed a break and though that’s understandable the consequences still haunt the West to this day; North Korea is a prime example, and China is possibly a future one.

Originally posted by jskywalker

You have to remember your government (Chinese) censors things and only teaches the history they want. You will never get the whole story (in America it is not illegal to do so) from the teachers in China.

That was true in China unfortunately, probably ten years ago.

We have tens of thousands of Chinese going to the US and UK each year to learn western knowledge and techology. Like me, a postgraduate doing Computer Science in the UK. I have been staying in the UK for about 2 years, and I have been to the US once for a university visit. I get the whole story, I know exactly what happened.

I had wondered how you were able to see this site. I presume this site is likely on Chinas blacklist I cant even begin to imagine what its like for people living behind the great firewall of China never mind living in China its self.

I would agree with you that any war against China (excluding nuclear weapons) would inevitably fail, fighting over 1/6 of the population usually isn't a good idea.

I do find it funny that the nation who doesn't want any country to have nukes are quite willing to use them on the same countries they want nuke free.

Originally posted by Edn

I would agree with you that any war against China (excluding nuclear weapons) would inevitably fail, fighting over 1/6 of the population usually isn't a good idea.

Thats not a tactiful advantage china has. In a conventional war china would lose alot of soldiers. How would they go about feeding, getting supplys to, and aid these ppl either medically or to reinforce them? Not to mention the out of date weapons that dont work for a large portion of the PLA. A conventional force such as Americas would have a tactiful advantage over the larger, poorly trained, poorly equiped, malnutritioned forces of china. In order for china to be a much more lethal force they need to drastically scale down there size of the PLA, and up the R&D.

I do find it funny that the nation who doesn't want any country to have nukes are quite willing to use them on the same countries they want nuke free.

The USA? Who are you talking about? First off, it was a chinese general who said that if the US came to aid taiwan in a military attack by china, china would be forced to use its nuclear weapons on the US. Just because a few arm chair generals think the US should or would use nukes doesnt mean the USA actually would. You should take it with a grain of salt.

Originally posted by Edn
I had wondered how you were able to see this site. I presume this site is likely on Chinas blacklist I cant even begin to imagine what its like for people living behind the great firewall of China never mind living in China its self.

That's an interesting point - we have heard from a Chinese person, but from the UK, not from China itself. This suggests that censorship is still alive and well in the good ol' PRC. Some of you might remember the case with Google adapting itself to censor certain sites in China - does this not prove censorship is still around too?

And if China was so great at the moment, surely you wouldn't have to come to the UK to learn computer science.

Another way to stop China, then - prevent Chinese students learning at Western universities. So you see, China is pretty vulnerable.

That's an interesting point - we have heard from a Chinese person, but from the UK, not from China itself. This suggests that censorship is still alive and well in the good ol' PRC. Some of you might remember the case with Google adapting itself to censor certain sites in China - does this not prove censorship is still around too?

I come form Beijing----capital of China.
Up to October this year, China has 123 millions of netizen
rank the second in the world.
censorship? yes, but they only focus on few very sensitive
topic such as falungong, 1989.6.4.... etc
no one can control so many netizen and so huge data stream, right?
About Korean war, I agree it was ended in a stalemate.
But the strongest country in the world armed with very advanced weapon
couldn't win a war over a poor country just finished civil war and
only armed with outdated rifle, you feel glory? I don't think so.
though communist has a lot of things to blame, but you have to agree
they bring China a strong army.
don't too confident of your power projection, if China and USA begin
a war, your military base and aircraft carrier around China will be wipe
out in the beginning.
and don't too confident of your missile defence system.
As I know a specific academe in PLA is researching for effective measure
to destroy it, I myself have a very simple measure to break your system
that is one missile armed with
1 real warhead and 99 fake warheads, will your defence system identify
which one is real?:-)your radar screen can only shows millions of shining point
fly toward you.
So don't fight with China, the best way for you is to help China change it's
political institution gradually to a democratic one,then you will get a great
ally in stead of a terrible enemy.


[edit on 22-11-2006 by gs001]

Originally posted by gs001
I come form Beijing----capital of China.

I live in Chengdu, going to Beijing in a couple weeks for a little last minute sight seeing before I move. Can't wait to hit up the silk market

censorship? yes, but they only focus on few very sensitive
topic such as falungong, 1989.6.4.... etc

And Tiananmen Square, any negative news about party members is censored, also Wikipedia.com is not reachable from Chinese internet. Most people think the PRC censors anything and everything.....that's not the case..like gs001 said, only a few topics.

However, in China, if someone (no matter what nationality) voices their opinion and publicily speaks about any of the "touchy" topics...they'll be told to keep quite and if they continue, they can go to jail and will probably get an instant beat down by the police or PLA troops depending on where it happened at.

I've asked a few Chinese friends what they think about the "touchy" topics, they usually just smile at me and quickily change the subject.

Chinese newspapers are very censored and restrcited on what they can publish. The China Daily is an english printed paper that targets foreign businessmen, expats, travellers (always on the many Chinese owned airlines), etc... and, imo, is all propaganda and even though it's still censored it's not as much as the Chinese printed papers because they know that Westerners can read through all the BS.

So don't fight with China, the best way for you is to help China change it's
political institution gradually to a democratic one,then you will get a great
ally in stead of a terrible enemy.

I agree, a war with China would only result in mass casulties for both sides and war-torn Chinese cities.

In my opinion a war with China is a possibility simply because of the dwindling resources. China has a booming manufacturing economy and the government is convinced of it's stature as the next world super-power. A rather imperialistic goal for a communist nation. The Marxist/Leninist principles that inspired the communist revolutions have all but been abandoned in favor of a brutal capitalistic nepotism that favors party members and the fortunate elite. The revolt in Tai chi (please excuse any spelling errors) bears witness to the fact that peasant land and resource is being appropriated by the rich for their own pursuit of wealth at the expense of the worker.

Democracy has also failed in favor of the same kind of corporate rush for gold and resource. The legacy of individual rights and freedoms has been vanquished. China does not have the same history of human rights and the wealthy elite of the world are anxious to embrace the same type of oppresive approach of state to citizen everywhere. This is bourne out by American support of Indonesian military dictatorship over the peaceful and democratic nation of East Timor.

China at this point is vulnerable to nuclear strike because of the relative smallness of the landmass and the concentration of population in certain areas. A nuclear strike would certainly wipe the country out. Russia has a much larger land mass and is less vulnerable to nuclear strike. The sheer lunacy of such speculation would not deter Dr. Strangelove.

China is certainly poised to attain economic advantage over the West and they have every intention of following it through. The wealthy elite are not inclined to argue with the notion, so long as their profits are improved by low wages and lack of rights for the worker.

Iraq was invaded shortly after Chavez proposed a new Eastern oil cartel. The clash of East and Western interests over the dwindling resources that will enable China to attain its mandate of global economic supremacy are still very much in existence. Where are the workers of the world now? At the bottom of the pile again.

I liken it to a street-fight. The political semantics are obsolete. The biggest bully will win and the mob runs the world. The people of the West do not want a war with the Chinese people, any more than the people of China have a history of invasion. However current economic trade models and the dwindling resources seem to insure its inevitability.

Originally posted by gs001
though communist has a lot of things to blame, but you have to agree
they bring China a strong army.

It could, and should be stronger.....

don't too confident of your power projection, if China and USA begin
a war, your military base and aircraft carrier around China will be wipe
out in the beginning.

Something about NOT being to overconfident... Wow, nice way to contradict yourself. Just how would china 'wipe out' US military bases and its aircraft carriers?

As I know a specific academe in PLA is researching for effective measure
to destroy it,

Well. sounds like the PLA is doing some "sh*tting in one hand while wishing in the other, to see which one feels up first" research....

and don't too confident of your missile defence system.
I myself have a very simple measure to break your system
that is one missile armed with
1 real warhead and 99 fake warheads, will your defence system identify
which one is real?:-)your radar screen can only shows millions of shining point
fly toward you.

Just how accurate do you think that would be? How do you know that, that 1 real warhead wouldnt make contact with one of the other 99 fake warheads while in mid flight? Not a very smart way of going about nukeing another nation. Especially if its your first and only shot. We would have had all your nuclear facilitys destroyed the second the chinese would do such a stupid thing. To many "ifs" and "buts" with your 'great' idea... And if worse comes to worse we still have our missle defence system to fall back on just in case.

So don't fight with China, the best way for you is to help China change it's
political institution gradually to a democratic one,then you will get a great
ally in stead of a terrible enemy.

No one wants to fight china. Humanity would be much better off by just working with each other to make this world a much better place to live for everyone.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by gs001]

[edit on 013030p://444 by semperfoo]

[edit on 013030p://444 by semperfoo]

[edit on 013030p://444 by semperfoo]

[edit on 013030p://444 by semperfoo]

Originally posted by semperfoo

Something about NOT being to overconfident... Wow, nice way to contradict yourself. Just how would china 'wipe out' US military bases and its aircraft carriers?

missile will be enough, isolated military bases are good targets for their attack:-)
aircraft carriers can be destroied by submarines, you should pray for finding
our submarines before your carriers sink.

Just how accurate do you think that would be? How do you know that, that 1 real warhead wouldnt make contact with one of the other 99 fake warheads while in mid flight? Not a very smart way of going about nukeing another nation. Especially if its your first and only shot. We would have had all your nuclear facilitys destroyed the second the chinese would do such a stupid thing. To many "ifs" and "buts" with your 'great' idea...

And if worse comes to worse we still have our missle defence system to fall back on just in case.

when nuclear weapons ere used, no one will care about its accuracy.
that means both side have determined to destroy this planet.
each side will try their best to throw more nuclear bomb to other's territory
If some targets missed, nuclear missiles from submarines will help fulfill
the task.
Do you know how many nuclear weapons China has? you don't? so don't I:-)
Money is not a problem for China, if China want to make more nuclear weapons,
no one can stop.
USA not only gets hatred from Arabia world, but also get hatred from China,
Russia and Latin America....etc,
even its ally EU angry about its behavior, such kind of country deserves punishment.


[edit on 23-11-2006 by gs001]

Originally posted by jskywalker
We know your language, your culture, your history, your people, almost everything apart from those "top CIA secret and top weapons" .

As for the top secret weapons, i would'nt be too sure how much china know.
Do you remember the newly developed neutron bomb and the spy plane they captured and did not give back.
I believe these to be the tip of the ice burg as to what china knows, america do get very embarrised when secret stuff gets stolen, and the chinese no longer need everyone to know what they have stolen

Just think ?

reaper2, when Russia starts buying weapons from China and the USA steals technology from China on a massive scale, then I will be worried about China's capabilities. With that being said, we should be more worried about Japan. I mean, they actually invent technology!

Originally posted by gs001

even its ally EU angry about its behavior, such kind of country deserves punishment.

What will happen to all the jobs that US corporations provide in your country if we are "punished" lol?