China admits it Can destroy US targets from China with a New Generation ICB

they can change governments every year, but their culture and history remains the same.

they withstood and eventually defeated the invasion of genghis khan, built the great wall of china, lead an invasion of the middle east and sacked baghdad (before america by the way) under the command of general guo kan lead by kublai khan and are responsible for arguably the 4 greatest inventions of mankind: paper, printing, gunpowder and the compass.

this was all centuries before america was even a gleam in englands nutsack.

throw in the art of war too. they don't just read it thinking they'll be the next gordon gekko, they live and breath it.

they also have a standing army of over 2 million soldiers and have ready for military service over 350,000,000 million people, more than the entire population of america.

not only that, add chinese discipline.

i doubt chinese generals allow their conscripts and troops to play xbox all day and fart in each others faces like i see on youtube.

this is a formidable army, unconquerable, armed with advanced weaponry and nukes and add americas record against asian countries and if i was america, i would check the arrogance at the door.

china views america much like an elephant views a fly. but a fly with nukes. to bad america has an aversion to reality.

imagine if they had dick cheney and donald rumsfeld running things. now that's scary.

reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy


I think the only way China doesn't overtake America on all levels within that time frame (or much sooner), is by way of interference/manipulation/collusion generated by those who would benefit from it not happening too soon.

Almost everything you buy in america now is already made in China.

I don't believe in coincidences, so I believe this is by design and not a matter of if, but when. And I think when is sooner than we think, especially when opposition to such is coming from someone who is paid to pad a US bias. (not you, but rather, sources inside the US)

Originally posted by HIWATT
You could say that nothing has changed, but the game board has gotten much more crowded... which I'm saying does change the game in that strategies and mindsets are influenced.

You know historically speaking a multi-polar world is actually more dangerous and less stable right?

Sooner or later the two biggest kids on the block will fight to see who is the baddest...

Doubt it?

It's called human history.
Check it out

For instance, the US cannot simply say "we're going to bomb the Japs back into the stone age!!" now, without reaping a whirlwind.

The US Bombed the snot out of Japan [China's Enemy] for good reason. Let me guess, in your eyes Japan was a victim during WW-II?

Almost every nation during WWII had no response to a nuclear attack.

Correction
No Nation had a response to it at the time that included the US.

Definitely not the case today.

"no more %$#@ing around" as they say.........

Do you honestly think you're making a logical argument or even a point?

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by HIWATT
Uranium is radioactive.

"depleted" or not

Did I ever say it wasn't? Such is implied in the statement "40% less radioactive". Good lord some people are dense.

Glad to see that, is no different than my 10 year old son.

edit on 12-12-2012 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)

Maybe you should take a vacation to Iraq and let your 10 year old son go play in the depleted uranium sandbox?

It's totally safe right?

...that's what I thought....

Originally posted by HIWATT
Maybe you should take a vacation to Iraq and let your 10 year old son go play in the depleted uranium sandbox?

You ignored the retort. You replied that I made the assumption it wasn't radioactive. Nice deflection though. I do enjoy your hyperbole though. Have you been there? Are there really sandboxes with just depleted uranium? I mean, you are presenting yourself as such an expert on the environment and radioactivity of Iraq, I would assume you have been there to extensively study it right?

...that's what I thought....

Called me out in the same post you proposed the question? Grow up.

reply to post by ownbestenemy


The claims are disputed and nothing more. Some say it doesn't affect people, others tend to disagree.

In 1993 the first Iraqi team of researchers from the Iraqi Atomic Commission and the science college of Baghdad University [7] [13] investigated the increase of DU related radioactivity in selected areas west of Al-Basrah where destroyed tanks and vehicles with DU ammunition were still laying around. The areas were: Northern Rumaila oil fields, Al-Shamia, Kharanje, Rumaila and Jabal Sanam. Exposure measurements revealed the existence of DU contamination in the studied areas.

And this was from testing only 3 years later

Selected measurements from exploration program results are shown in (Table 5). Modeling pollution transport from hundreds of destroyed artilleries to surrounding areas showed the following extensions of DU contamination in the area from 1991 – 1996 [17] [18] [19]:

- 1718 km² of soil contaminated with DU oxides and particles,

- 140,000 m² of channel sediments,

- 845, 100 tons of vegetation cover

When we have conflicting information about the issue, we are only playing a guessing game.. Our scientists will tell us it isn't a hazard, others can prove it possibly is. Maybe they were just hoping everyone would forget about it amongst all the confusion.

But just to make things worse, we go ahead and pull the same crap in 03 with lots more.. I'm not saying I know but there is certainly some controversy surrounding the subject and I don't think we are being told the entire truth with it. Has anyone found the true answer to the Gulf War Sydrome?

DU in Iraq

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by HIWATT
You could say that nothing has changed, but the game board has gotten much more crowded... which I'm saying does change the game in that strategies and mindsets are influenced.

You know historically speaking a multi-polar world is actually more dangerous and less stable right?

Sooner or later the two biggest kids on the block will fight to see who is the baddest...

Doubt it?

It's called human history.
Check it out

For instance, the US cannot simply say "we're going to bomb the Japs back into the stone age!!" now, without reaping a whirlwind.

The US Bombed the snot out of Japan [China's Enemy] for good reason. Let me guess, in your eyes Japan was a victim during WW-II?

Almost every nation during WWII had no response to a nuclear attack.

Correction
No Nation had a response to it at the time that included the US.

Definitely not the case today.

"no more %$#@ing around" as they say.........

Do you honestly think you're making a logical argument or even a point?

1. I never stated that the world is "less dangerous" with a Nuclear Armed China. Don't put words in my mouth.

2. The reasons why Japan was bombed are irrelevant. My point was that the US was the first (and only nation since) to use Nuclear Weapons against another nation.

3. Germany and Russia could have also had Nuclear weapons in some fashion during WWII. This is debatable but likely not provable.

4. I must be making a point, or you wouldn't be trolling me so hard.

night

reply to post by DarknStormy


Agreed and I don't discount those studies. I was responding to the poster that said we have extensively used nuclear weapons ever since WWII. I pointed out that DU is not a nuclear weapon. That of course is for another topic than what is at hand. I will gladly engage in the semantics there to avoid this getting grossly off topic.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by DarknStormy

 

Agreed and I don't discount those studies. I was responding to the poster that said we have extensively used nuclear weapons ever since WWII. I pointed out that DU is not a nuclear weapon. That of course is for another topic than what is at hand. I will gladly engage in the semantics there to avoid this getting grossly off topic.

Yeah thats going a bit over the top.. I wouldn't call them Nuclear weapons, Iraq is still inhabitable at least

this one's on the house.

if i were america i would be more worried about chinese spies and saboteurs hiding among the massive chinese american communities than i would be about a taliban extremist tending goats in afghanistan.

do you know a chinese national can go to america, kill a dozen americans, sabotage the economy, launder money, steal technology, commit all sorts of crimes and if he manages not to get caught and make it to mainland china, get away scot free and there is nothing the u.s. can do about it.

and probably get a medal too.

there is no extradition treaty with china and it is chinese policy not to extradite any citizen to any country no matter the crime.

and as a permanent member of the u.n. security council with veto powers, the u.s. can't even get 1 lousy sanction passed against it.

short of war, there's nothing. i bet there must be so many covert assassinations and operations going on between the two countries that'll it make your head spin if you found out because of this.

No big deal, they could always get one in if they wanted too anyway!
So its missiles instead of shipping containers.... I'm sure there's incredible tech out on the waters in the boats to shoot down atleast 100 nuclear icbms... and anyway by the time they come in, everyone elses would have left the silo's too!

I'd be worried if I was Australia but...

reply to post by randomname


No offense but is that the total sum of your argument?
The regurgitation of over the top American Stereotypes?


The old Cold War is over. The Soviet Union bit the dust and is gone. Eastern Europe joined NATO, China dumped Mao's little red book in favor of Capitalism. Vietnam is now requesting US naval presence [Imagine that] Japan, South Korea and all points east [Including China] have flourished.

Yes, China takes the long view on things. They have wisely invested in the US. It's a great return. Ask yourself this. In the past 236+ years how stable has North America been compared to Europe and Asia in the same amount of time?

Originally posted by spangledbanner
This is not good.

China can destroy targets anywhere in the world with the new gen ICB.

I wonder if China can be trusted with these types of weapons. I also dread to think what China will do with these weapons if WW3 does break out. I wonder what else China are developing?

Can the US win a new arms race with if the 'fiscal cliff' is not avoided? The automatic military cuts might put National Security at risk. Maybe the should be more money put in to missile defence.

I dunno if China can be trusted but the Chinese aren't invading countries, overthrowing governments and stealing foreign assets. It's equally clear that our own fedgov absolutely can't be trusted.

You talk of defense cuts putting this country at risk? You're joking ..... right? I would suggest that the words "National Security" be replaced wherever they are found with the term "National Fraud". The facts are: The pentagon is sucking the life out this country to maintain a empire, while our politicians, central banksters and Wall Street are looting the treasury. I don't know why anyone would take the federal government seriously when they borrow 46% of every dollar they spend.

The US is a totally failed state. We do not need to be in an "arms race" period. We need to gut this criminal empire and rebuild our country.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Ask yourself this. In the past 236+ years how stable has North America been compared to Europe and Asia in the same amount of time?

Stable? WTF?

Is that some kind of code word for "false flag"? Or maybe "stable" is secret code for illegal aggressive war, kidnapping, secret prisons, torture, murder, rape, theft and using WMD (DU) on civilians? Or perhaps you think "stable" means aiding and abetting fraud domestically and worldwide resulting in the economic destruction of many countries .... including our own?

If that's the state you are referring to, we are seriously STABLE.

Originally posted by jcarpenter
Stable? WTF?

Yes, Stable.

How many World Wars have been fought in North America during the same amount of time? Europe had two not to mention all the European conflicts in the 18th and 19th centuries with borders and territories being drawn and redrawn on maps. How many conflicts in Asia in the same amount of time as well?

Is that some kind of code word for "false flag"?

That's your Kool-Aid.
You poured it, you drink it.

Or maybe "stable" is secret code for illegal aggressive war, kidnapping, secret prisons, torture, murder, rape, theft and using WMD (DU) on civilians? Or perhaps you think "stable" means aiding and abetting fraud domestically and worldwide resulting in the economic destruction of many countries .... including our own?

All very Interesting and would make great thread topics for a worthy discussion all on their own merits but it still does not negate the fact that North America by comparison has been more stable than either Europe or Asia. As for the rest. There is plenty of blame to go around. The rest of the world is not at all innocent nor pure white as the driven snow.

reply to post by spangledbanner

Can the US win a new arms race if the 'fiscal cliff' is not avoided?

For some reason, the military spending and the 'fiscal cliff' seem to be mutually exclusive.

Commies are the only ones to ever use nuclear weapons.
Oops, I mean democrats.

reply to post by spangledbanner


Can China be trusted with such weapons? I think it's amusing we'd even ask that and a real sign of the times for how far out of control things have gotten. As if thats even a question the U.S. has the right to ask of another nation in any serious way. Who did elect us ruler of the Planet anyway? I think China would, if asked, laugh a little and tell us to come do something about it if we don't care for their military systems.

At the same time, Obama and Biden have both made frequent, loud and obnoxious statements for over a year now about the new focus of major U.S. Naval power into the Western Pacific to counter Chinese influence. I wonder...Why ever would China feel pressured and a little uncomfortable? I mean, it's not like this isn't how it's started before with nations we end up destroying, right? First...it's just more forces to observe. Then one day? We're invading and calling their Capital city a new Civil Affairs project for fresh Army recruits to play with.

I think we met our match and China is one to work with...in respect. They'll clean our clocks and stomp our workshop while they're at it...if we go to THEIR backyard with the idea of telling them how it is though. Jyust as we'd do it to THEM if they did that here.

Originally posted by HIWATT

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by HIWATT
LIES
One thing to say to that:
Go POUND SAND.
RADIOACTIVE sand....

Lies? So science and research of the material is lies because you say so? Okay. I see where this thread is headed. Have fun in your head.

Uranium is radioactive."depleted" or not

So is Chemotherapy Whats your point and logic here? Dont you think the US military and politicians are aware of the Grand Chess Game? Dont you think what you're stating is not under consideration already by the Governments across the world? Russia was provided with the nuke technology back in the days to balance the power (after the successful test in new mexico). With Russia defeated in the Cold War, China was the best candidate to fill their role of the 'boogeyman'. Thats how the Cold War thrived and many innovations and technological breakthroughs were achieved How do you think most governments operate or get things done (pass laws and collect taxes) ? By keeping the citizens in a constant or frequent state of fear and struggle. Of all the money and time spent on the weapons since WWII (After the 2 necessary nuclear explosions on Japan to end the war), there hasn't been a single large scale war like WWI or WWII. Did you noticed? Eitherway it is not like the Chinese admission was a secret. Most of the CCCP (Soviet Union) technology was sold to their neighbor after their downfall.
LINK1
LINK2

If China hits the U.S. who will buy all their stuff? A lot of countries are financially tied to one another. A strike on their customers would not be good for business.