# China Training For War With Japan



## Sawbriars

Many indicators that China is preparing for some sort of limited conflict with Japan...expect this before Obama ends his term...the Chinese know Obama is too weak to do anything about it.


Navy Official: China Training for 'Short Sharp War' with Japan | USNI News


----------



## rightwinger

China will get their butts kicked

Their Navy sucks


----------



## g5000

Saber rattling for political ends.


----------



## Sallow

Sawbriars said:


> Many indicators that China is preparing for some sort of limited conflict with Japan...expect this before Obama ends his term...the Chinese know Obama is too weak to do anything about it.
> 
> 
> Navy Official: China Training for 'Short Sharp War' with Japan | USNI News





And the Nazis have a moon base.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py_IndUbcxc]Iron Sky Official Theatrical Trailer [HD] - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## westwall

This is where the fight will occur,

China ships in disputed waters: Japan coastguard | NDTV.com

and contrary to leftwingers opinion, China has been building a blue water navy for several years now.

These moves into the 'distant seas' would seem inevitable for a nation as large as China, he said. But it goes without saying that this expansion into blue waters is largely about countering the Pacific Fleet.

Chinas Xinhua news agency reported that a PLA Navy destroyer and two frigates exercising in the Western Pacific earlier this year were practicing maritime confrontation, open-sea mobile combat, law enforcement and open-sea naval commanding.

Make no mistake, the PLA Navy is focused on war at sea and about sinking an opposing fleet, Fanell said.

There is evidence that the PLA Navy has ambitions even beyond the Pacific.

Van Tol said China sent a frigate through the Suez Canal in 2011 to evacuate citizens during unrest in Libia, and Chinese ships have participated in anti-piracy efforts off the coast of Somalia."




China's naval aspirations: A 'blue-water' force - Stripes - Independent U.S. military news from Iraq, Afghanistan and bases worldwide


----------



## JakeStarkey

China, once again, will get its naval and air butts kicked.

Since no one is going to invade China, there is no problem.


----------



## rightwinger

westwall said:


> This is where the fight will occur,
> 
> China ships in disputed waters: Japan coastguard | NDTV.com
> 
> and contrary to leftwingers opinion, China has been building a blue water navy for several years now.
> 
> These moves into the 'distant seas' would seem inevitable for a nation as large as China, he said. But it goes without saying that this expansion into blue waters is largely about countering the Pacific Fleet.
> 
> Chinas Xinhua news agency reported that a PLA Navy destroyer and two frigates exercising in the Western Pacific earlier this year were practicing maritime confrontation, open-sea mobile combat, law enforcement and open-sea naval commanding.
> 
> Make no mistake, the PLA Navy is focused on war at sea and about sinking an opposing fleet, Fanell said.
> 
> There is evidence that the PLA Navy has ambitions even beyond the Pacific.
> 
> Van Tol said China sent a frigate through the Suez Canal in 2011 to evacuate citizens during unrest in Libia, and Chinese ships have participated in anti-piracy efforts off the coast of Somalia."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China's naval aspirations: A 'blue-water' force - Stripes - Independent U.S. military news from Iraq, Afghanistan and bases worldwide



We have names for Chinas ships........Targets


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is where the fight will occur,
> 
> China ships in disputed waters: Japan coastguard | NDTV.com
> 
> and contrary to leftwingers opinion, China has been building a blue water navy for several years now.
> 
> These moves into the 'distant seas' would seem inevitable for a nation as large as China, he said. But it goes without saying that this expansion into blue waters is largely about countering the Pacific Fleet.
> 
> Chinas Xinhua news agency reported that a PLA Navy destroyer and two frigates exercising in the Western Pacific earlier this year were practicing maritime confrontation, open-sea mobile combat, law enforcement and open-sea naval commanding.
> 
> Make no mistake, the PLA Navy is focused on war at sea and about sinking an opposing fleet, Fanell said.
> 
> There is evidence that the PLA Navy has ambitions even beyond the Pacific.
> 
> Van Tol said China sent a frigate through the Suez Canal in 2011 to evacuate citizens during unrest in Libia, and Chinese ships have participated in anti-piracy efforts off the coast of Somalia."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China's naval aspirations: A 'blue-water' force - Stripes - Independent U.S. military news from Iraq, Afghanistan and bases worldwide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have names for Chinas ships........Targets
Click to expand...







Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.


----------



## rightwinger

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is where the fight will occur,
> 
> China ships in disputed waters: Japan coastguard | NDTV.com
> 
> and contrary to leftwingers opinion, China has been building a blue water navy for several years now.
> 
> These moves into the 'distant seas' would seem inevitable for a nation as large as China, he said. But it goes without saying that this expansion into blue waters is largely about countering the Pacific Fleet.
> 
> Chinas Xinhua news agency reported that a PLA Navy destroyer and two frigates exercising in the Western Pacific earlier this year were practicing maritime confrontation, open-sea mobile combat, law enforcement and open-sea naval commanding.
> 
> Make no mistake, the PLA Navy is focused on war at sea and about sinking an opposing fleet, Fanell said.
> 
> There is evidence that the PLA Navy has ambitions even beyond the Pacific.
> 
> Van Tol said China sent a frigate through the Suez Canal in 2011 to evacuate citizens during unrest in Libia, and Chinese ships have participated in anti-piracy efforts off the coast of Somalia."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China's naval aspirations: A 'blue-water' force - Stripes - Independent U.S. military news from Iraq, Afghanistan and bases worldwide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have names for Chinas ships........Targets
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
Click to expand...


If China sets her eyes on Japan, they will deal with the US Navy

They would be obliterated


----------



## TheOldSchool

Obama should come out and say if someone attack's Japan they attack America too.

That would silence half of his detractors and be the most badass thing he's done in his presidency.  Sadly, there's no way that'll happen


----------



## Indeependent

What if Japan's equipment was made in China?
What is Japan's military was made in China?
What if I don't give a sh!t?


----------



## rightwinger

TheOldSchool said:


> Obama should come out and say if someone attack's Japan they attack America too.
> 
> That would silence half of his detractors and be the most badass thing he's done in his presidency.  Sadly, there's no way that'll happen



He doesn't have to say it. It has been US policy for 50 years


----------



## TheOldSchool

Indeependent said:


> What if I don't give a sh!t?



Then 22 of the words you've used in your life were wasted in that post


----------



## Sawbriars

The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate &#8220;a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.

Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forces&#8212;ballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the like&#8212;that Washington dare not get involved.

As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.


----------



## rightwinger

Sawbriars said:


> The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate &#8220;a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.
> 
> Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forces&#8212;ballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the like&#8212;that Washington dare not get involved.
> 
> As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.



In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines. 
An attack on Japan would be impossible


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.
> 
> Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forcesballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the likethat Washington dare not get involved.
> 
> As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
Click to expand...







Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.

Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.

They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.


----------



## Sawbriars

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.
> 
> Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forcesballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the likethat Washington dare not get involved.
> 
> As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
Click to expand...


Excellent analysis and we must also understand that everyday China is getting stronger aka...spending more and more on their military and all the whilst we are getting weaker...being forced to cut back.  

One option I have seen bandied about is for us to concentrate on building cruise missile bases all over the Pacific ...the idea being it would be cheaper to do this than to spend billions upgrading our Pacific fleet to counter the Chinese.  

What it might all come down to is a game of poker....aka who is able to bluff the best.  I cannot see Obama standing up to a serious challenge from China...I do not think he has the moral courage to deal with such a serious challenge. 

 China will threaten to go all in and Obama will fold his cards.....this is going to happen and most will be shocked when it does....America will be humiliated and forced to circle the wagons around the CONUS...with all the ramifications that entails.  

China is not simply engaging in 'saber rattling' as some believe....they are incrementally setting the stage to demonstsrate to the world their power and their ability to humiliate and curtail America.

Now  serious wargamers know that China must either expand or constrict.....they desperately need more territory for their huge and growing population...their military is very hawkish and extremely eager to demonstrate their capabilities......meanwhile America is preoccupied with such things as ball games, gender bending, homosexual marriage, racial problems, economic stupidity, obamacare and a general malaise with most Americans feeling hopeless for the first times in their lives....the American Dream is dead and no one in Washington is willing to make the hard decisions needed to get the USA back on track.


----------



## Indeependent

China will stop supplying the US with toilet paper.
It's the little things that win the war.


----------



## Indofred

This thread has some really amusing posts.

The idiots are moaning about Chinese ships being in disputed waters off China but totally ignore the minor detail, there are American ships in disputed waters off China, that's half a world away from America.

China or Japan may be right on this issue but America is wrong.
Sod all to do with you.


----------



## Indeependent

Indofred said:


> This thread has some really amusing posts.
> 
> The idiots are moaning about Chinese ships being in disputed waters off China but totally ignore the minor detail, there are American ships in disputed waters off China, that's half a world away from America.
> 
> China or Japan may be right on this issue but America is wrong.
> Sod all to do with you.



Anything for the MNCs.


----------



## TheTruthMaster

Let me tell you something.

When you have a weak incapable indecisive President such as Obum-uh, conflicts like these are going to be very common.


----------



## Indofred

TheTruthMaster said:


> Let me tell you something.
> 
> When you have a weak incapable indecisive President such as Obum-uh, conflicts like these are going to be very common.



Yes, this is so much worse than a strong president like Bush starting illegal wars that killed thousands of Americans.
This is between the countries concerned but, sadly, the American arms industry pulls the strings and war means great business.
America would get dragged in again, all for your arms industry's profits.


----------



## rightwinger

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.
> 
> Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forcesballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the likethat Washington dare not get involved.
> 
> As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
Click to expand...


Ever see the landing at Normandy? It took 1000 ships and complete air superiority. China has neither. They might have a million man army, but unless they march them into the sea they will not make it


----------



## TheTruthMaster

Indofred said:


> TheTruthMaster said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let me tell you something.
> 
> When you have a weak incapable indecisive President such as Obum-uh, conflicts like these are going to be very common.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, this is so much worse than a strong president like Bush starting illegal wars that killed thousands of Americans.
> This is between the countries concerned but, sadly, the American arms industry pulls the strings and war means great business.
> America would get dragged in again, all for your arms industry's profits.
Click to expand...


I do openly admit that the Iraq war was a flop and failure. There were no weapons of mass destruction found. But think about it, if we were to let Saddam live, it's just a matter of time before he starts issuing orders to attack other countries like what he did to Kuwait in the early 90s. And you will get the whole region (Mid East) be in turmoil.


----------



## Sawbriars

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ever see the landing at Normandy? It took 1000 ships and complete air superiority. China has neither. They might have a million man army, but unless they march them into the sea they will not make it
Click to expand...


I do not think China has any plans for a massive invasion regarding either Taiwan or the mainland of Japan in the foreseeable future....what I do see them preparing to do and sometime before the end of Obama's term is a takeover of some small island claimed by Japan...it will be however a huge symbolic victory with huge ramifications for the future.


----------



## rightwinger

Sawbriars said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever see the landing at Normandy? It took 1000 ships and complete air superiority. China has neither. They might have a million man army, but unless they march them into the sea they will not make it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do not think China has any plans for a massive invasion regarding either Taiwan or the mainland of Japan in the foreseeable future....what I do see them preparing to do and sometime before the end of Obama's term is a takeover of some small island claimed by Japan...it will be however a huge symbolic victory with huge ramifications for the future.
Click to expand...


What ramifications ?


----------



## Sawbriars

Another big factor in all of this of course is what will Japan do?...and particuarly will they feel the need to .....or be forced to go Nuclear?

  I read a report once saying Japan may already have a few nuclear weapons and even if they do not...they could get them very quickly.  

I kinda believe they have them already but they are not fully assembled...thus allowing them deniability...they could probably be assembled in a couple of hours or less....and they no doubt also have the means to deliver them and have pre-selected targets in China.

China of course with their incredible intelligence network no doubt is fully aware of this....thus their very calculated and extremely cautious approach to asserting their power and dominance in the region...very incrementally ...the strategy being to make small gains based on the reluctance of Japan and America to initiate any military response whatsoever...even of a very limited nature.  

There is however always the chance of a miscalculation....Japan might suprise them...Japan is no one's fool..........even Obama might suprise them and everybody else.....no gurantees in these high stakes global strategic ploys.


----------



## Sawbriars

rightwinger said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ever see the landing at Normandy? It took 1000 ships and complete air superiority. China has neither. They might have a million man army, but unless they march them into the sea they will not make it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not think China has any plans for a massive invasion regarding either Taiwan or the mainland of Japan in the foreseeable future....what I do see them preparing to do and sometime before the end of Obama's term is a takeover of some small island claimed by Japan...it will be however a huge symbolic victory with huge ramifications for the future.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What ramifications ?
Click to expand...


It would give a huge boost to the influence of the hard line Chinese Generals to begin with.  

Even moderate Chinese political leaders could not help to see the significance of a reluctance aka failure of the U.S. and Japan to stand up to Chincese provocation....ever hear of Munich?  

When dictators or any totolatarian government like China's see such weakness on the part of it's enemies ...it encourages them to engage in even stronger military adventures....to the point where a real war cannot be avoided aka....Germany's invasion of Poland.


----------



## rightwinger

Sawbriars said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not think China has any plans for a massive invasion regarding either Taiwan or the mainland of Japan in the foreseeable future....what I do see them preparing to do and sometime before the end of Obama's term is a takeover of some small island claimed by Japan...it will be however a huge symbolic victory with huge ramifications for the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What ramifications ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It would give a huge boost to the influence of the hard line Chinese Generals to begin with.
> 
> Even moderate Chinese political leaders could not help to see the significance of a reluctance aka failure of the U.S. and Japan to stand up to Chincese provocation....ever hear of Munich?
> 
> *When dictators or any totolatarian government like China's see such weakness on the part of it's enemies ...it encourages them to engage in even stronger military adventures....to the point where a real war cannot be avoided aka....Germany's invasion of Poland*.
Click to expand...


Now you are going silly on us

China is sabre rattling. Makes them feel good and gives them the sense of a global presence. 
But the capitalists will win out over the militarists. They always do
China needs trading partners in Japan, S Korea, the US and EU
They will not do anything to provoke an economic retalliation


----------



## Unkotare

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.
> 
> Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forcesballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the likethat Washington dare not get involved.
> 
> As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
Click to expand...


Losses are still an issue even if you have a population of 1.3 billion. Losses are very much an issue when you are still in the process of building up your military strength.

As for Japan, by the time China is strong enough to really consider doing so, obama will be out of office. Hopefully, the American people will vote more carefully next time.


----------



## Moonglow

TheOldSchool said:


> Obama should come out and say if someone attack's Japan they attack America too.
> 
> That would silence half of his detractors and be the most badass thing he's done in his presidency.  Sadly, there's no way that'll happen



They already have..


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> .....they desperately need more territory for their huge and growing population....




No, they don't. What they want is to control shipping lanes, regional trade, and access to resources.


----------



## Unkotare

Indofred said:


> This is between the countries concerned ...





America is one of the countries concerned, flea.


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> ...the strategy being to make small gains based on the reluctance of Japan and America to initiate any military response whatsoever...even of a very limited nature.  ...





Abe has expressed no such reluctance.


----------



## Sawbriars

Unkotare said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....they desperately need more territory for their huge and growing population....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, they don't. What they want is to control shipping lanes, regional trade, and access to resources.
Click to expand...


They want much more than that...they have territorial claims on 20 of it's neighbors and of course they took over Tibet.  Just recently they seized some Philippine territory and the U.S. did nothing.

MyTurf Wireless ads


----------



## Sawbriars

Looks like my link above got hijacked....let me try again..........UPDATE: China Will Trade Debt for US Land? | Pumas Unleashed


----------



## Sawbriars

China wants and needs more farm land>>>>Why China Wants (and Needs) Foreign Farm Land ? News Watch


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....they desperately need more territory for their huge and growing population....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, they don't. What they want is to control shipping lanes, regional trade, and access to resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They want much more than that...they have territorial claims on 20 of it's neighbors and of course they took over Tibet.  Just recently they seized some Philippine territory and the U.S. did nothing.
Click to expand...


Those are disputes over where borders should be drawn, not acquisitions of land for a "growing population" (which it turns out is not their long-term problem).


----------



## Indeependent

Sawbriars said:


> Looks like my link above got hijacked....let me try again..........UPDATE: China Will Trade Debt for US Land? | Pumas Unleashed



There are lots of highways, tunnels and bridges that are owned by foreign nations.


----------



## rightwinger

Why would China want to attack Japan?

They are a valuable trade partner


----------



## Sawbriars

China is leasing land all over Africa.......Chinese food security may be motivating investments in Africa | Global development | theguardian.com


----------



## GHook93

rightwinger said:


> China will get their butts kicked
> 
> Their Navy sucks



What are you talking about smokey?!? China has the 3rd largest navy in the world and is working in entering the aircraft carrier club. Japan is 4th, but don't make it seem like the Chinese are weak!

Military: List of the Top 10 Largest Navies in the World

They have the third largest airforce also.

Military: Top 10 Largest Air Force in the World

The also have the 3rd most powerful army!

Military: Top 10 Most Powerful Armies in the World


----------



## rightwinger

Sawbriars said:


> China is leasing land all over Africa.......Chinese food security may be motivating investments in Africa | Global development | theguardian.com



Is it worse than what the Western world has done to Africa?


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is leasing land all over Africa.......Chinese food security may be motivating investments in Africa | Global development | theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it worse than what the Western world has done to Africa?
Click to expand...


You mind Bill Gates using Africans for pharmaceutical experiments instead of mice?


----------



## GHook93

TheOldSchool said:


> Obama should come out and say if someone attack's Japan they attack America too.
> 
> That would silence half of his detractors and be the most badass thing he's done in his presidency.  Sadly, there's no way that'll happen



He shouldn't say it. No red-lines. China already knows this. However, Japan is tough enough to take care of herself. 

Nevertheless, this is silly. We train to fight nearly every country out there including China and Russia. That doesn't mean we are going to attack them. Same with China. They might be training on fighting Japan, but I doubt China is interested in possibly starting WW III!!! 

We should be on prepared and position ourselves in case of a war, but we should realize there is a SMALL probability of China attacking Japan!


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is leasing land all over Africa.......Chinese food security may be motivating investments in Africa | Global development | theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it worse than what the Western world has done to Africa?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mind Bill Gates using Africans for pharmaceutical experiments instead of mice?
Click to expand...


Link


----------



## rightwinger

GHook93 said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama should come out and say if someone attack's Japan they attack America too.
> 
> That would silence half of his detractors and be the most badass thing he's done in his presidency.  Sadly, there's no way that'll happen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He shouldn't say it. No red-lines. China already knows this. However, Japan is tough enough to take care of herself.
> 
> Nevertheless, this is silly. We train to fight nearly every country out there including China and Russia. That doesn't mean we are going to attack them. Same with China. They might be training on fighting Japan, but I doubt China is interested in possibly starting WW III!!!
> 
> We should be on prepared and position ourselves in case of a war, but we should realize there is a SMALL probability of China attacking Japan!
Click to expand...


China attacks Japan and it means the US, S Korea and EU takes sides against them

Why would they piss off their major trade partners?


----------



## mamooth

China isn't going to invade Taiwan. They don't want a smoking ruin, they want Taiwan and its wealth intact, just like Hong Kong, and that happens by the political process.

And thinking Obama is "weak' is highly delusional ODS. Confident men don't need to talk tough to prove they're not wimps. That's why the conservatives here spend their days trying to talk tough. Look at Bush, with his tough-talk and needless war-starting, all because of his daddy issues. Bush is the like role-model for the sissymen who badly need to compensate for something.


----------



## Sallow

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is where the fight will occur,
> 
> China ships in disputed waters: Japan coastguard | NDTV.com
> 
> and contrary to leftwingers opinion, China has been building a blue water navy for several years now.
> 
> These moves into the 'distant seas' would seem inevitable for a nation as large as China, he said. But it goes without saying that this expansion into blue waters is largely about countering the Pacific Fleet.
> 
> Chinas Xinhua news agency reported that a PLA Navy destroyer and two frigates exercising in the Western Pacific earlier this year were practicing maritime confrontation, open-sea mobile combat, law enforcement and open-sea naval commanding.
> 
> Make no mistake, the PLA Navy is focused on war at sea and about sinking an opposing fleet, Fanell said.
> 
> There is evidence that the PLA Navy has ambitions even beyond the Pacific.
> 
> Van Tol said China sent a frigate through the Suez Canal in 2011 to evacuate citizens during unrest in Libia, and Chinese ships have participated in anti-piracy efforts off the coast of Somalia."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China's naval aspirations: A 'blue-water' force - Stripes - Independent U.S. military news from Iraq, Afghanistan and bases worldwide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have names for Chinas ships........Targets
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
Click to expand...


Really?

China tried invading Vietnam.

Guess what happened.


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it worse than what the Western world has done to Africa?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mind Bill Gates using Africans for pharmaceutical experiments instead of mice?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link
Click to expand...


Gates Foundation Critique - Techrights

Only one of many when googling for Bill Gates Africa Pharmaceuticals.
An HIV vaccination was only one of many experiments bypassing the mouse for humans.
Over 240,000 humans.
What the hell, they're Black.

My son did an entire paper on this rat's phony Foundations 2 years ago.


----------



## Unkotare

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/media-center/press-releases/2012/01/foundation-commits-$750-million-to-global-fund


----------



## Unkotare

Bill Gates: Malaria Can Be Eradicated


----------



## Sawbriars

Sallow said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have names for Chinas ships........Targets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> China tried invading Vietnam.
> 
> Guess what happened.
Click to expand...


Here is actually what happened........................The Chinese entered Northern Vietnam and advanced quickly about 1520 kilometers into Vietnam, with fighting mainly occurring in the provinces of Cao B&#7857;ng, Lào Cai and L&#7841;ng S&#417;n. The Vietnamese avoided mobilizing their regular divisions, and held back some 300,000 troops for the defence of Hanoi. The Vietnamese forces tried to avoid direct combat, and often used guerrilla tactics.

The initial Chinese attack soon lost its momentum, and a new wave of attack was sent in. Eight Chinese divisions joined the battle, and captured some of the northernmost cities in Vietnam. After capturing the northern heights above Lang Son, the Chinese surrounded and paused in front of the city in order to lure the Vietnamese into reinforcing it with units from Cambodia. This had been the main strategic ploy in the Chinese war plan as Deng did not want to risk an escalation involving the Soviet Union. The VPA high command, after a tip-off from Soviet satellite intelligence, was able to see through the trap[citation needed], however, and committed reserves only to Hanoi.

Once this became clear to the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA), the war was practically over. An assault was still mounted, but the Vietnamese only committed one VPA regiment defending the city.[citation needed] After three days of bloody house-to-house fighting, Lang Son fell on March 6. The PLA then took the southern heights above Lang Son[29] and occupied Sapa. The PLA claimed to have crushed several of the Vietnamese regular units.[5]

The Chinese now resumed their attacks aimed at the major provincial capitals and key communication centres in the border hinter land. Major battles developed at Cao B&#7857;ng, Lang Son, Hoang Lien Son, Lai Chau and Quang Ninh. The aim of these attacks was to draw in the regular Vietnamese Army formations and inflict heavy attrition on them through classical "meat-grinder" operations. There were fierce attacks and counterattacks. In Lang Son the Chinese launched 17 counterattacks to regain one objective.

By late last week of February, the Vietnamese had still not committed any of their regular divisions which were being held back for the defence of Hanoi. They had also not pulled out any of their 150,000 troops in Cambodia. In the provincial capital the Vietnamese adopted their favourite tactic: they withdrew from the towns into the adjoining hills. As the Chinese formations surged in they were engaged from all sides from the surrounding hills and quite severely mauled. At the same time, due to the crude tactics and strategy of the PLA command, PLA units also suffered extensive casualties themselves. The combination of high casualties, a badly organized command, harsh Vietnamese resistance and the risk of the Soviets entering the conflict stopped the Chinese from going any farther.[citation needed]

On March 6, China declared that the gate to Hanoi was open and that their punitive mission had been achieved. On the way back to the Chinese border, the PLA destroyed all local infrastructure and housing and looted all useful equipment and resources (including livestock), which were mainly donated by China to support Vietnam's economy prior to the war, severely weakening the economy of Vietnam's northernmost provinces.[5] The PLA crossed the border back into China on March 16. Both sides declared victory with China claiming to have crushed the Vietnamese resistance and Vietnam claiming to have repelled the invasion using mostly border militias.


*LINK ADDED*

Sino-Vietnamese War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> China tried invading Vietnam.
> 
> Guess what happened.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is actually what happened........................
Click to expand...



No, HERE is what actually happened: you just committed plagiarism.


----------



## Sunshine

Sawbriars said:


> The Chinese military has fundamentally changed its strategy in just the last year or so....... recent writings by PLA officers indicate a growing confidence within the PLA that they can prevent U.S. involvement if they attack Taiwan or Japan" and it now appears they are more apt to attack Japan....they have not forgotten what Japan did to them....the desire for revenge is very strong.
> 
> Beijing believes it can attack Taiwan or another neighbor while also bloodlessly deterring U.S. intervention. It would do so by deploying such overwhelmingly strong military forcesballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, jet fighters and the likethat Washington dare not get involved.
> 
> As one Chinese General bluntly put it..."would America sacrifice Los Angeles in order to defend Taiwan" and recent American actions gives them many reasons to think it would not ....aka Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.  The well known American reluctance to take casualties is having a major influence on Chinese Planning.



When I was in Beijing in 2002 they likened Taiwan to the state of Texas, and announced their intent to take it back.  You can read Chinese newspapers online in English if you so desire.


----------



## Sunshine

Sallow said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have names for Chinas ships........Targets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> China tried invading Vietnam.
> 
> Guess what happened.
Click to expand...


There was vastly more to Vietnam than today's small minded liberals can grasp.  Yes, China supplied a lot of troops.  But that war was lost because we did not understand how they were fighting it.  And it was more about LBJ making money off of it than anything else.


----------



## Indeependent

Unkotare said:


> Bill Gates: Malaria Can Be Eradicated



Of course it can...With TAX MONEY and experiments on HUMANS in Africa.
He's worth over 50 billion and the average research for a medicine costs 360 million.
Think Mr. Gates can afford it?


----------



## Unkotare

Indeependent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Gates: Malaria Can Be Eradicated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it can...With TAX MONEY and experiments on HUMANS in Africa.
> He's worth over 50 billion and the average research for a medicine costs 360 million.
> Think Mr. Gates can afford it?
Click to expand...



How much have YOU done to help suffering people in Africa? Sure, you're not worth 50 billion, but you must be worth _something_, right?


----------



## Sunshine

Indeependent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Gates: Malaria Can Be Eradicated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it can...With TAX MONEY and experiments on HUMANS in Africa.
> He's worth over 50 billion and the average research for a medicine costs 360 million.
> Think Mr. Gates can afford it?
Click to expand...


Do you know why there are so many blacks with cycle cell anemia?  I challenge you to look that one up.  It is an interesting read.  And yes, it is connected to malaria in a strange sort of way.


----------



## Indeependent

Unkotare said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Gates: Malaria Can Be Eradicated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it can...With TAX MONEY and experiments on HUMANS in Africa.
> He's worth over 50 billion and the average research for a medicine costs 360 million.
> Think Mr. Gates can afford it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How much have YOU done to help suffering people in Africa? Sure, you're not worth 50 billion, but you must be worth _something_, right?
Click to expand...


So I guess everyone who's wealthy and wants TAX PAYERS to foot the bill of some supposedly phony humanitarian endeavor is okee dokee by you.

Now I know why everyone here calls you a loon.


----------



## Unkotare

You didn't answer my question.


----------



## Indeependent

Sunshine said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Gates: Malaria Can Be Eradicated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it can...With TAX MONEY and experiments on HUMANS in Africa.
> He's worth over 50 billion and the average research for a medicine costs 360 million.
> Think Mr. Gates can afford it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you know why there are so many blacks with cycle cell anemia?  I challenge you to look that one up.  It is an interesting read.  And yes, it is connected to malaria in a strange sort of way.
Click to expand...


And I guarantee you that, God willing, more than one pharmaceutical company is going to come out with a medication to manage these diseases.

Bill Gates is NOT righteous.


----------



## Unkotare

You still haven't answered my question.


----------



## Indeependent

Unkotare said:


> You still haven't answered my question.



Because your question is a strawman...rich people = good people.
This has NOTHING to do with Bill Gates sucking TAX MONEY and experimenting on HUMANS.
You MUST watch FoxNews.


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ever see the landing at Normandy? It took 1000 ships and complete air superiority. China has neither. They might have a million man army, but unless they march them into the sea they will not make it
Click to expand...









And you are ignoring the realities of life with a weak POTUS.  We could have the strongest naval presence in the area but if they are told to stand down, they will.  That's reality.


----------



## westwall

Unkotare said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of planning for over 60 years, China is incapable of invading Taiwan a mere 90 miles away. They lack the Naval strength to traverse the straight without being wiped out by missiles, aircraft and submarines.
> An attack on Japan would be impossible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Losses are still an issue even if you have a population of 1.3 billion. Losses are very much an issue when you are still in the process of building up your military strength.
> 
> As for Japan, by the time China is strong enough to really consider doing so, obama will be out of office. Hopefully, the American people will vote more carefully next time.
Click to expand...






China launched a punitive attack against Vietnam and lost over 200,000 in the process just to show the Vietnamese government they could.  Vietnam quit being belligerent.


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is leasing land all over Africa.......Chinese food security may be motivating investments in Africa | Global development | theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it worse than what the Western world has done to Africa?
Click to expand...









Wow, 100 year old history to try and make a point.  You're slippin' dude...


----------



## Indeependent

westwall,
How exactly do we know China's military capabilities?
Radar?  UN Inspections?


----------



## westwall

Sallow said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have names for Chinas ships........Targets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> China tried invading Vietnam.
> 
> Guess what happened.
Click to expand...







No, she didn't.  She launched a punitive expedition and lost 200,000 men to make a point.  The Vietnamese understood what happened and stopped being dicks.  Maybe you should read more history and military theory.  The Vietnamese sure understood the message....I am not shocked you didn't.


----------



## westwall

Indeependent said:


> westwall,
> How exactly do we know China's military capabilities?
> Radar?  UN Inspections?








There are a whole host of military reporters researching China's military capability and they report in a whole host of magazines such as these.....I have subscriptions to all four and have done so for years.

Aerospace Defense Business & Commercial Aviation News, Blogs, Videos and Photos by Aviation Week

MILITARY TECHNOLOGY

Global Defence News and Defence Headlines - IHS Jane's 360

Combat Aircraft Monthly: The World's Favourite Military Aviation Magazine


----------



## Sawbriars

Sunshine said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, if WE decide to shoot, that is correct.  However, if Japan is left to fend for herself, she will lose.  That was the point of the OP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> China tried invading Vietnam.
> 
> Guess what happened.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was vastly more to Vietnam than today's small minded liberals can grasp.  Yes, China supplied a lot of troops.  But that war was lost because we did not understand how they were fighting it.  And it was more about LBJ making money off of it than anything else.
Click to expand...


One of the best observations I have ever read concerning the Vietnam War came from none other than Moshe Dayan.

Dayan concluded that Viet Cong tactics and strategy were working, but that American strategy was, at best, barely succeeding. The Viet Cong's M.O., he said, "was to attack American units with the aim of destroying them when the prospect of success seemed bright.Ninety out of every one hundred battles in the Vietnam War began  on Viet Cong initiative, when they deemed the circumstances favorable."

As for the Americans, Dayan wrote that they did not make the destruction of the enemy "conditional on a favorable tactical situation." American commanders, he said, "were eager to make contact with the Viet Cong at all times, in any situation, and at any price."

Someone in the upper echelons should have listened to him.


----------



## bianco

rightwinger said:


> China will get their butts kicked
> 
> Their Navy sucks




Looks like Japan is about to get nuked again.


Hopefully the first thing China blows up is the Japanese whaling fleet...which is still invading Antartica and slaughtering whales.


----------



## Unkotare

Indeependent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You still haven't answered my question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because your question is a strawman...rich people = good people...
Click to expand...



Actually, since I never made that argument, what you are trying to do now is a straw man. Maybe you don't understand the term. Anyway, answer the question.


----------



## Unkotare

westwall said:


> China launched a punitive attack against Vietnam and lost over 200,000 in the process just to show the Vietnamese government they could.  Vietnam quit being belligerent.





That's not entirely why, and they have a lot more to lose now.


----------



## Unkotare

bianco said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> China will get their butts kicked
> 
> Their Navy sucks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Japan is about to get nuked again...
Click to expand...



No it doesn't. You're an idiot.
















































Oh, and whale is delicious, btw.


----------



## rightwinger

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever see the landing at Normandy? It took 1000 ships and complete air superiority. China has neither. They might have a million man army, but unless they march them into the sea they will not make it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are ignoring the realities of life with a weak POTUS.  We could have the strongest naval presence in the area but if they are told to stand down, they will.  That's reality.
Click to expand...


What is it with Republicans?

They try that "weak on defense" nonsense on every Democratic President. Don't you realize nobody is buying it anymore? President Obama is strong on diplomacy, that does not make him weak on defense


----------



## GHook93

westwall said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anytime China decided to attack Taiwan she could.  She would also suffer tremendous losses but when you have a billion people that's not a issue.  The reason why China hasn't bothered is because they have been quietly converting the people over to their side for a long time.  In the next 20 years or so Taiwan will beg to be let back into the fold.
> 
> Japan, on the other hand is a different challenge.  That's why China has been developing a blue water navy.  She has been waiting for a weak POTUS, like the one in office, so that if they decide to act...we won't.
> 
> They are weighing the pro's and cons of an attack to take the islands right now.  How much western money will they lose if they decide to go.  Is it worth the financial hit to do it.  When those numbers pencil out, they'll move, and ain't no one going to stop them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Losses are still an issue even if you have a population of 1.3 billion. Losses are very much an issue when you are still in the process of building up your military strength.
> 
> As for Japan, by the time China is strong enough to really consider doing so, obama will be out of office. Hopefully, the American people will vote more carefully next time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> China launched a punitive attack against Vietnam and lost over 200,000 in the process just to show the Vietnamese government they could.  Vietnam quit being belligerent.
Click to expand...


China invaded Vietnam because Vietnam invaded Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge from slaughtering millions of people. You have your facts wrong. China invaded in a German style Blitz, but the Vietnamese fought back hard and had the Chinese runnng back over the border with their tails between their legs. In one month of fighting, the Chinese lost more soldiers than the US lost in a decade (estimates are the Chinese lost between 63K-200K based on who you talk to). The Chinese accomplished nothing.



> http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iCgcnUw68LFsvOSb34kr-rFAdsjA
> 
> Despite its advantage in numbers and strength, China fought to a bloody stalemate and had no effect on Vietnam's foreign policy, he said.
> 
> The Chinese government "saw little to boast about and this undoubtedly helps explain the lack of official acknowledgement of this war and those who fought in it," Worthing said.


----------



## Sawbriars

GHook93 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Losses are still an issue even if you have a population of 1.3 billion. Losses are very much an issue when you are still in the process of building up your military strength.
> 
> As for Japan, by the time China is strong enough to really consider doing so, obama will be out of office. Hopefully, the American people will vote more carefully next time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China launched a punitive attack against Vietnam and lost over 200,000 in the process just to show the Vietnamese government they could.  Vietnam quit being belligerent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> China invaded Vietnam because Vietnam invaded Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge from slaughtering millions of people. You have your facts wrong. China invaded in a German style Blitz, but the Vietnamese fought back hard and had the Chinese runnng back over the border with their tails between their legs. In one month of fighting, the Chinese lost more soldiers than the US lost in a decade (estimates are the Chinese lost between 63K-200K based on who you talk to). The Chinese accomplished nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AFP: In China, war with Vietnam is forgotten history
> 
> Despite its advantage in numbers and strength, China fought to a bloody stalemate and had no effect on Vietnam's foreign policy, he said.
> 
> The Chinese government "saw little to boast about and this undoubtedly helps explain the lack of official acknowledgement of this war and those who fought in it," Worthing said.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


You are mostly correct about why China invaded N. Vietnam...it was an attempt to get the Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia, to demonstrate to Russia that they could not protect Vietnam and also as a punitive strike against N. Vietnam....all this occurred right after the Sino-Soviet split when there was border fighting between Russia and China.

The Chinese strategy was to draw Vietnam into a major battle necessitating their withdrawal of forces from Cambodia to fight China...this  failed because Russian intelligence tipped of Vietnam of China's strategy.

When it became apparant to China that Vietnam would not fall into their trap....they decided to withdraw mainly because they did not want to provoke Russia too much...a Russian invasion of China at that was a real possibility and the Russians had tried to convince America to go in with them on a pre-emptive strike to destroy Chinas nuclear program.

However, it was not a stalemate....anyone who thinks China even at that time when their military was much inferior to what it is now could not have completely occupied Vietnam is living in fantasy land.

The N. Vietnamese to their credit did put up a good fight....but this was not what prompted the Chinese withdrawal....China had very limited goals to begin with...mainly to get the Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia...when that failed they decided to withdraw fearing that if they went too far into Vietnam the Soviets would react.


----------



## mamooth

I've heard all the yellow peril talk before. It was most notable before 9/11. The liberals were saying "hey, pay attention to the Taliban", but the conservatives were fixated with laser-like precision on China, telling us all how China was about to overrun the African oil fields and the Panama Canal.

Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles.


----------



## Unkotare

mamooth said:


> Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles.





Liberals need an enemy, and America is almost always the only one they are comfortable targeting. The trouble with that is how it FUCKS UP THE COUNTRY.


----------



## Sawbriars

mamooth said:


> I've heard all the yellow peril talk before. It was most notable before 9/11. The liberals were saying "hey, pay attention to the Taliban", but the conservatives were fixated with laser-like precision on China, telling us all how China was about to overrun the African oil fields and the Panama Canal.
> 
> Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles.



The nature of the massive Chinese Investment in Africa is evolving and there is such a lack of information on all that ---it will be some time before it can be said with precision what the true motivation of China in Africa is...even if they know themselves...you can find many anecdotal stories on the negative and the positive side.

Regarding the Panama Canal...here is an interesting piece>>>

Chinese tycoon plans to rival Panama Canal with $40 billion waterway through Nicaragua - Washington Times


----------



## GHook93

Sawbriars said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> China launched a punitive attack against Vietnam and lost over 200,000 in the process just to show the Vietnamese government they could.  Vietnam quit being belligerent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China invaded Vietnam because Vietnam invaded Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge from slaughtering millions of people. You have your facts wrong. China invaded in a German style Blitz, but the Vietnamese fought back hard and had the Chinese runnng back over the border with their tails between their legs. In one month of fighting, the Chinese lost more soldiers than the US lost in a decade (estimates are the Chinese lost between 63K-200K based on who you talk to). The Chinese accomplished nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AFP: In China, war with Vietnam is forgotten history
> 
> Despite its advantage in numbers and strength, China fought to a bloody stalemate and had no effect on Vietnam's foreign policy, he said.
> 
> The Chinese government "saw little to boast about and this undoubtedly helps explain the lack of official acknowledgement of this war and those who fought in it," Worthing said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are mostly correct about why China invaded N. Vietnam...it was an attempt to get the Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia, to demonstrate to Russia that they could not protect Vietnam and also as a punitive strike against N. Vietnam....all this occurred right after the Sino-Soviet split when there was border fighting between Russia and China.
> 
> The Chinese strategy was to draw Vietnam into a major battle necessitating their withdrawal of forces from Cambodia to fight China...this  failed because Russian intelligence tipped of Vietnam of China's strategy.
> 
> When it became apparant to China that Vietnam would not fall into their trap....they decided to withdraw mainly because they did not want to provoke Russia too much...a Russian invasion of China at that was a real possibility and the Russians had tried to convince America to go in with them on a pre-emptive strike to destroy Chinas nuclear program.
> 
> However, it was not a stalemate....anyone who thinks China even at that time when their military was much inferior to what it is now could not have completely occupied Vietnam is living in fantasy land.
> 
> The N. Vietnamese to their credit did put up a good fight....but this was not what prompted the Chinese withdrawal....China had very limited goals to begin with...mainly to get the Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia...when that failed they decided to withdraw fearing that if they went too far into Vietnam the Soviets would react.
Click to expand...


China wants this buried in the history books because it was a major disappointment. Russia wasn't about to Invade China and they were not seeking America's help in doing so. Where the hell did you get that?

FACTS: China goal was to protect their ally, the murderous and just as bad as the NAZIs Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot. They failed bigtime and ran back across the border with possibly 200K dead Chinese soliders. That would have been the equilavent to 20% of their army!


----------



## GHook93

mamooth said:


> I've heard all the yellow peril talk before. It was most notable before 9/11. The liberals were saying "hey, pay attention to the Taliban", but the conservatives were fixated with laser-like precision on China, telling us all how China was about to overrun the African oil fields and the Panama Canal.
> 
> Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles.



What a crock of horse-shit! First, conservatives have warned the Muslims are the west's greatest threat, yet it's you libtards that constantly protect and placate them. We should be mindful of China. In reality the only countries that militarily poss a threat to us in a conventional war are: Russia, China, Britian and India. Not much chance of a war with Britian and India, but Russia and China are another story. We should be mindful. Regardles of the conventional war threat, China is a huge economic threat. We owe them a ton of cash, they manipulate their currency and use unfair trade practices to steal our manufacturing sector. We should be mindful of the trade war they have against America!


----------



## mamooth

GHook93 said:


> First, conservatives have warned the Muslims are the west's greatest threat,



Only after 9/11. Prior to that, conservatives were mostly ignoring the muslims and screaming about China.

It was the liberals who were talking about the Taliban. Granted, that was more focused on human rights issues than terrorism issues, but at least the liberals were pointing out how we should be very concerned that islamicists had taken control of Afghanistan.


----------



## JakeStarkey

China is not going to attack Taiwan and certainly not Japan.

China is not going to hold LA as a hostage because the USA will melt all of China into a radioactive parking lot.


----------



## rightwinger

JakeStarkey said:


> China is not going to attack Taiwan and certainly not Japan.
> 
> China is not going to hold LA as a hostage because the USA will melt all of China into a radioactive parking lot.



China has a big enough problem controlling their own people. They have no capability to attack offshore


----------



## Unkotare

mamooth said:


> It was the liberals who were talking about the Taliban. .




No it wasn't. With typical hypocrisy, liberals - notably 'women's rights' groups largely remained silent the more we learned about the treatment of women under the Taliban.


----------



## bianco

Unkotare said:


> bianco said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> China will get their butts kicked
> 
> Their Navy sucks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Japan is about to get nuked again...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't. You're an idiot.
> 
> 
> Oh, and whale is delicious, btw.
Click to expand...



Full of mercury, Japanese are sending themselves crazy by eating it.
Justice for Migalooo and his friends.

Time someone blew up Japan's whaling fleet.


----------



## Geaux4it

Sawbriars said:


> Many indicators that China is preparing for some sort of limited conflict with Japan...expect this before Obama ends his term...the Chinese know Obama is too weak to do anything about it.
> 
> 
> Navy Official: China Training for 'Short Sharp War' with Japan | USNI News



Also, Japan want's in the arms export business further poking the eye of the Chinese

-Geaux

Japan drafts revision of arms exports ban: source | Reuters


----------



## Unkotare

bianco said:


> Time someone blew up Japan's whaling fleet.





Your weak sandbox sure as hell won't do it.


----------



## Geaux4it

bianco said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianco said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Japan is about to get nuked again...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't. You're an idiot.
> 
> 
> Oh, and whale is delicious, btw.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Full of mercury, Japanese are sending themselves crazy by eating it.
> Justice for Migalooo and his friends.
> 
> Time someone blew up Japan's whaling fleet.
Click to expand...


I got news for you. Japan has AEGIS. Nuff said..

Additionally, their fleet is kept in top form. They treat their ships as their home and it looks that way. Immaculate. Rust is myth to them

Now, on American ships that's another story. 

-Geaux


----------



## Sawbriars

GHook93 said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> 
> China invaded Vietnam because Vietnam invaded Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge from slaughtering millions of people. You have your facts wrong. China invaded in a German style Blitz, but the Vietnamese fought back hard and had the Chinese runnng back over the border with their tails between their legs. In one month of fighting, the Chinese lost more soldiers than the US lost in a decade (estimates are the Chinese lost between 63K-200K based on who you talk to). The Chinese accomplished nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are mostly correct about why China invaded N. Vietnam...it was an attempt to get the Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia, to demonstrate to Russia that they could not protect Vietnam and also as a punitive strike against N. Vietnam....all this occurred right after the Sino-Soviet split when there was border fighting between Russia and China.
> 
> The Chinese strategy was to draw Vietnam into a major battle necessitating their withdrawal of forces from Cambodia to fight China...this  failed because Russian intelligence tipped of Vietnam of China's strategy.
> 
> When it became apparant to China that Vietnam would not fall into their trap....they decided to withdraw mainly because they did not want to provoke Russia too much...a Russian invasion of China at that was a real possibility and the Russians had tried to convince America to go in with them on a pre-emptive strike to destroy Chinas nuclear program.
> 
> However, it was not a stalemate....anyone who thinks China even at that time when their military was much inferior to what it is now could not have completely occupied Vietnam is living in fantasy land.
> 
> The N. Vietnamese to their credit did put up a good fight....but this was not what prompted the Chinese withdrawal....China had very limited goals to begin with...mainly to get the Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia...when that failed they decided to withdraw fearing that if they went too far into Vietnam the Soviets would react.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> China wants this buried in the history books because it was a major disappointment. Russia wasn't about to Invade China and they were not seeking America's help in doing so. Where the hell did you get that?
> 
> FACTS: China goal was to protect their ally, the murderous and just as bad as the NAZIs Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot. They failed bigtime and ran back across the border with possibly 200K dead Chinese soliders. That would have been the equilavent to 20% of their army!
Click to expand...


You should do better research before you open your pie hole>>>>>USSR planned nuclear attack on China in 1969 - Telegraph


----------



## Sawbriars

The Chinese and Russian Border Conflict

The Sino-Soviet Border Conflict, 1969: U.S. Reactions and Diplomatic Maneuvers


----------



## Sawbriars

Regarding the ridicuously report of Chinese Casualties in their punitive strike into N. Vietnam

Chinese casualties

The number of casualties during the war is disputed. Vietnamese source claimed the PLA had suffered 62,500 total casualties; while Chinese democracy activist Wei Jingsheng told western media in 1980 that the Chinese troops had suffered 9,000 deaths and about 10,000 wounded during the war. New Chinese sources indicated that China only suffered 6,954 lost.


----------



## Sawbriars

More On The Sino-Vietnamese Clash

SinoVietnamese War


----------



## bianco

Unkotare said:


> bianco said:
> 
> 
> 
> Time someone blew up Japan's whaling fleet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your weak sandbox sure as hell won't do it.
Click to expand...



True.
One day we might graduate from pop guns and mortars...and get some of the latest weapons, and plenty of them.
Useless politicians.
Nuke powered and nuke armed subs, ICBMs, and long range nuke etc armed drones etc.
As it stands today, the sandbox is just a doormat and boot licker of Japan.

We might get lucky, China might do the job for us.


----------



## Sallow

mamooth said:


> I've heard all the yellow peril talk before. It was most notable before 9/11. The liberals were saying "hey, pay attention to the Taliban", but the conservatives were fixated with laser-like precision on China, telling us all how China was about to overrun the African oil fields and the Panama Canal.
> 
> *Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles*.



Of course they do.

Anyone that has ever travelled to China and have friends who are Chinese know that modern China has one overwhelming interest.

Commerce.


----------



## Unkotare

bianco said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianco said:
> 
> 
> 
> Time someone blew up Japan's whaling fleet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your weak sandbox sure as hell won't do it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> True.
> One day we might graduate from pop guns and mortars...and get some of the latest weapons, and plenty of them.
> Useless politicians.
> Nuke powered and nuke armed subs, ICBMs, and long range nuke etc armed drones etc.
> As it stands today, the sandbox is just a doormat and boot licker of Japan.
> 
> We might get lucky, China might do the job for us.
Click to expand...




Be careful what you wish for, Dundee. If China ever does anything regarding your sandbox it will be TO you, not FOR you.  At which point you'd all piss yourselves and come crying to us for help, of course.


----------



## Unkotare

Sallow said:


> Anyone that has ever travelled [sic] to China and have [sic] friends who are Chinese know [sic] that modern China has one overwhelming interest.
> 
> Commerce.




Of course they do. That's a large part of the point behind China's growing 'assertiveness,' and it doesn't preclude unfortunate missteps along the way.


----------



## Sawbriars

Sallow said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard all the yellow peril talk before. It was most notable before 9/11. The liberals were saying "hey, pay attention to the Taliban", but the conservatives were fixated with laser-like precision on China, telling us all how China was about to overrun the African oil fields and the Panama Canal.
> 
> *Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they do.
> 
> Anyone that has ever travelled to China and have friends who are Chinese know that modern China has one overwhelming interest.
> 
> Commerce.
Click to expand...


The above is the typical sort of shallow thinking one sees constantly on this board....and unfortunately much of the thinking that is going on in Washington in regards to China which of course has led to our appeasement of China>>>>>>South China Sea And The United States - Analysis


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard all the yellow peril talk before. It was most notable before 9/11. The liberals were saying "hey, pay attention to the Taliban", but the conservatives were fixated with laser-like precision on China, telling us all how China was about to overrun the African oil fields and the Panama Canal.
> 
> *Conservatives need an enemy, and China is often a convenient one. The trouble with that is how it takes eyes off the real troubles*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they do.
> 
> Anyone that has ever travelled to China and have friends who are Chinese know that modern China has one overwhelming interest.
> 
> Commerce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The above is the typical sort of shallow thinking one sees constantly on this board....and unfortunately much of the thinking that is going on in Washington in regards to China
Click to expand...




You know a lot of Chinese people, numbskull? Ever so much as set foot in China?


----------



## mamooth

Unkotare said:


> No it wasn't. With typical hypocrisy, liberals - notably 'women's rights' groups largely remained silent the more we learned about the treatment of women under the Taliban.



Bullshit. Treatment of women under the Taliban was precisely what the liberals and women's groups were focusing on, all pre-9/11.

Where do you come up with your bizarre alternate-reality fantasies? Remember, you telling lies about us does not make us hypocrites.


----------



## Unkotare

mamooth said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it wasn't. With typical hypocrisy, liberals - notably 'women's rights' groups largely remained silent the more we learned about the treatment of women under the Taliban.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit. Treatment of women under the Taliban was precisely was the liberals and women's groups were focusing on, all pre-9/11..
Click to expand...




Bullshit. Just as they mostly kept their mouths shut while Bill Clinton was busy forcing other women's mouths open, these so-called women's groups have always been about leftist politics rather than the reality many women have long suffered under. Can't 'judge' another country/culture/faith so keep your mouth shut. Clinton is a democrat, so keep your mouth shut. Instead, channel all that energy into writing books about how sex between a husband and wife is "rape" under any circumstances, fomenting campus outrage over the use of pronouns, and denigrating educated, married women who choose to stay home and raise families. Just as long as you can get your target group to vote the 'correct' way...


----------



## Sawbriars

As China surges and Moscow threatens Ukraine this administration wants to shrink our military>>>>>>>>Pentagon plans to shrink US Army to pre-WWII level


----------



## bianco

Unkotare said:


> bianco said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your weak sandbox sure as hell won't do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True.
> One day we might graduate from pop guns and mortars...and get some of the latest weapons, and plenty of them.
> Useless politicians.
> Nuke powered and nuke armed subs, ICBMs, and long range nuke etc armed drones etc.
> As it stands today, the sandbox is just a doormat and boot licker of Japan.
> 
> We might get lucky, China might do the job for us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be careful what you wish for, Dundee. If China ever does anything regarding your sandbox it will be TO you, not FOR you.  At which point you'd all piss yourselves and come crying to us for help, of course.
Click to expand...


Not if you allowed us to have nukes...and plenty of them.
Which you won't do.
You cry "Nuclear non proliferation", so we dutifully sign up...and leave ourselves defenceless.
But China, Russia, India, Pakistan, NK, Iran etc are allowed to have nukes and build missiles that can reach us.
Japan will have nukes next, you watch.


----------



## Mr. President

They can sink a US ship or two but after that it's goodnight china!!!  Japan is no lackluster military force either.


----------



## Unkotare

bianco said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianco said:
> 
> 
> 
> True.
> One day we might graduate from pop guns and mortars...and get some of the latest weapons, and plenty of them.
> Useless politicians.
> Nuke powered and nuke armed subs, ICBMs, and long range nuke etc armed drones etc.
> As it stands today, the sandbox is just a doormat and boot licker of Japan.
> 
> We might get lucky, China might do the job for us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be careful what you wish for, Dundee. If China ever does anything regarding your sandbox it will be TO you, not FOR you.  At which point you'd all piss yourselves and come crying to us for help, of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not if you allowed us to have nukes...and plenty of them.
> Which you won't do..
Click to expand...



You idiots are too backward to be trusted with pointy sticks, let alone nuclear weapons. Just play in your sandbox and if we need you to do something we'll give you your orders.


----------



## Unkotare

bianco said:


> Japan will have nukes next, you watch.





Japan already has nukes - they have us as an ally. And they could put together their own in about half an hour if necessary. You savages, on the other hand, are lucky if you can start a fire by rubbing two sticks together. If it rains, you're outta luck 'mate.'


----------



## SayMyName

Fortunately, in the end, more reasonable minds are at the helm. 

U.S. plays down tension with China, upbeat on military exchanges


----------



## Sawbriars

SayMyName said:


> Fortunately, in the end, more reasonable minds are at the helm.
> 
> U.S. plays down tension with China, upbeat on military exchanges



"They treated my people's wound superficially, telling them, 'Peace, peace,' but there is no peace"

On the heels of Hagel's declaration of intent to reduce American Forces to pre WWII levels......come this news today>>>>>>China ups military spend by 12 percent. Are the gloves coming off? - CSMonitor.com.

The Western failure  in its confrontation with Putin will only serve to invigorate the Chinese Military adventurists......look for a military move on a island claimed by japan.....within 6 months....the Chinese are not adverse to a limited military action...in fact they crave one...to demonstrate their military capability...to show the great improvements they have been made.   

In addition to wanting to demonstrate their military capability they want to humiliate Japan as well as the USA.


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> ......look for a military move on a island claimed by japan.....within 6 months....the Chinese are not adverse to a limited military action...in fact they crave one...to demonstrate their military capability...to show the great improvements they have been made.
> 
> In addition to wanting to demonstrate their military capability they want to humiliate Japan as well as the USA.





And when, after six months, that has not happened, will you finally STFU?


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

SayMyName said:


> Fortunately, in the end, more reasonable minds are at the helm.
> 
> U.S. plays down tension with China, upbeat on military exchanges



I'm posting this clip from your article, SayMyName. 

 "I believe we have lots in common, with not only the Chinese government but the Chinese military. It's important for us that we emphasize engagement, dialogue and understanding and build trust between our militaries.

China and the United States have numerous diplomatic disagreements in the region, including China's moves to assert sovereignty in the South and East China Sea and U.S. support for self-ruled Taiwan, claimed by Beijing as a wayward province.

"Those are all issues that we've been working through for a long time and will continue to work through," Odierno said.

The Chinese and U.S. militaries have faced off on several occasions in recent years, raising the fear of an unintended clash because of a lack of proper communication channels between the two sides.

In December, a U.S. guided missile cruiser operating in international waters in the South China Sea was forced to take evasive action to avoid a collision with a Chinese warship maneuvering nearby.

______________________

This is about Taiwan as Odierno points out.  What he fails to mention is that we have a treaty concerning Taiwan.   So America will respond when the Chinese invade Taiwan.  Then after America responds Russia is going to respond by attacking the United States.  We are not too far off now.


----------



## Sawbriars

China is a ascending power...America is a declining power.....who can deny that?   

To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.

Now we see the 'shallow thinkers' on this boad claiming China is only interested in economics...aka inhancing their trade and economy....such naivety and or gullibility is also rampant in Washington...demonstrated very well by Hillary's statement that China needs America.....but the real question is>>>>for how long?

Another fact that is understood by the intelligence community is the dangerous reality that the Chinese Political Structure does not have firm control of their Military Forces....they are to a great extent a independent power....far different from how the U.S. Military is totally subservient to our Political Leaders. 

 The Chinese Military is very close to being a independent force in China and if it achieves a couple of notable military successes in its current policy of military adventurism...it may become the dominant power in China.

China?s military rise: The dragon?s new teeth | The Economist


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.






No, one needs more than just that. Have you ever so much as set foot in China?


----------



## Sawbriars

A huge fallacy being made by the peaceniks in Washington is that they do not understand Chinese thinking....using western logic it makes no sense for China to foment trouble with it's current trading partners....aka....the infamous hillary statement..."China Needs America".....The Chinese are extremely intelligent and understand the West much better than we understand them....they know our weaknesses and have exploited them in the past and will continue to do so.....the simple fact is that it is a cold cruel world and the wimpy dullards in Washington are ill-suited to deal with it.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/21/this_week_at_war_whos_chinese_military_is_


----------



## Sawbriars

A link that works>>>>>>Whose Chinese Military Is It?

This Week at War: Whose Chinese Military Is It?


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

Sawbriars said:


> China is a ascending power...America is a declining power.....who can deny that?
> 
> To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.
> 
> Now we see the 'shallow thinkers' on this boad claiming China is only interested in economics...aka inhancing their trade and economy....such naivety and or gullibility is also rampant in Washington...demonstrated very well by Hillary's statement that China needs America.....but the real question is>>>>for how long?
> 
> Another fact that is understood by the intelligence community is the dangerous reality that the Chinese Political Structure does not have firm control of their Military Forces....they are to a great extent a independent power....far different from how the U.S. Military is totally subservient to our Political Leaders.
> 
> The Chinese Military is very close to being a independent force in China and if it achieves a couple of notable military successes in its current policy of military adventurism...it may become the dominant power in China.
> 
> China?s military rise: The dragon?s new teeth | The Economist



The speech I read from one of their military commanders was by far one of the most chilling speeches I have ever seen.  He spoke of the necessity of land the chinese people needed - that invading the United States and killing 200 million Americans was justifiable as the Chinese were a superior people. 

( I don't know why he said 200 million Americans instead of 300 plus but that was the number he gave )   So long as American citizens do not disarm this would be impossible of course.


----------



## Sawbriars

Jeremiah said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> China is a ascending power...America is a declining power.....who can deny that?
> 
> To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.
> 
> Now we see the 'shallow thinkers' on this boad claiming China is only interested in economics...aka inhancing their trade and economy....such naivety and or gullibility is also rampant in Washington...demonstrated very well by Hillary's statement that China needs America.....but the real question is>>>>for how long?
> 
> Another fact that is understood by the intelligence community is the dangerous reality that the Chinese Political Structure does not have firm control of their Military Forces....they are to a great extent a independent power....far different from how the U.S. Military is totally subservient to our Political Leaders.
> 
> The Chinese Military is very close to being a independent force in China and if it achieves a couple of notable military successes in its current policy of military adventurism...it may become the dominant power in China.
> 
> China?s military rise: The dragon?s new teeth | The Economist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The speech I read from one of their military commanders was by far one of the most chilling speeches I have ever seen.  He spoke of the necessity of land the chinese people needed - that invading the United States and killing 200 million Americans was justifiable as the Chinese were a superior people.
> 
> ( I don't know why he said 200 million Americans instead of 300 plus but that was the number he gave )   So long as American citizens do not disarm this would be impossible of course.
Click to expand...


I think their current policy is a incremental approach to dominance...bit by bit....first economic dominance and then to gradually increase their hedgemony via limited military actions and the accumulation of such military force as to prohibit any foreign challenges via all out war...as one Chinese General was famous for saying.."Would America sacrifice Los Angeles for Taiwan?"....that sums it up.

The old American Strategy we used against Russia in the Cold War aka the 'Mad doctrine'  or Mutual Assured Destruction...which more or less worked against Russia will not be the correct strategy to deal with China...first of all because it is more bluff than anything...and the Chinese are great gamblers....they will not be bluffed.

The bottom line is simply this...unless we have very strong leadership in Washington willing to maintain our military dominance in the Pacific we will eventually at best become a vassal state of China....the chinese already are beginning to realize we will never be able to repay the massive debt we have built up with them....thus already we see diplomtic efforts on their part to lease American land or industrial areas in America staffed by Chinese as a payback for all the money we owe them...such efforts now are being bandied about by the diplomats...(after all we have an official policy of diversity)eventually such requests may be handled by the Chinese Military and they will not be requests...they will demand it.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

The Russian and Chinese spies know where our nuclear warehouses are.  They have had a tour of NORAD ( russians ) They've been planning this for decades.  They have all their military equip in place.  That was the difficult part.  Their soldiers can easily come across the border and blend in as civilians until they get the order to attack.   The reality that the cold war never ended is a stark one.  The Chinese played along too in order to enrich themselves but this is no longer in their interest to continue the relationship with the US.  We're out of money, out of collateral and we've got nothing else to trade.  These are not the type of people that write off debts.  

 This is the side of communism most Americans have never witnessed firsthand and once the tanks roll in?   Then it will be too late to do anything about it.


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> A huge fallacy being made by the peaceniks in Washington is that they do not understand Chinese thinking....using western logic it makes no sense for China to foment trouble with it's current trading partners....aka....the infamous hillary statement..."China Needs America".....The Chinese are extremely intelligent and understand the West much better than we understand them....]





Pointless stereotypes, generalizations, and exoticizing of the 'other.' 

Readers should feel free to disregard his dope's drivel.


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> The bottom line is simply this...unless we have very strong leadership in Washington willing to maintain our military dominance in the Pacific we will eventually at best become a vassal state of China....the chinese already are beginning to realize we will never be able to repay the massive debt we have built up with them....thus already we see diplomtic efforts on their part to lease American land or industrial areas in America staffed by Chinese as a payback for all the money we owe them...such efforts now are being bandied about by the diplomats...(after all we have an official policy of diversity)eventually such requests may be handled by the Chinese Military and they will not be requests...they will demand it.





Absolute nonsense.


----------



## Sawbriars

Unkotare said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is simply this...unless we have very strong leadership in Washington willing to maintain our military dominance in the Pacific we will eventually at best become a vassal state of China....the chinese already are beginning to realize we will never be able to repay the massive debt we have built up with them....thus already we see diplomtic efforts on their part to lease American land or industrial areas in America staffed by Chinese as a payback for all the money we owe them...such efforts now are being bandied about by the diplomats...(after all we have an official policy of diversity)eventually such requests may be handled by the Chinese Military and they will not be requests...they will demand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute nonsense.
Click to expand...


Hardly........unfortunately the truth is just not well understood or even known....how many heard of the following:

UPDATE: China Will Trade Debt for US Land? | Pumas Unleashed

China poised to play debt card ? for U.S. land


Impeachment Time: Obama Grants Eminent Domain Rights to China to Secure Debt - Washington DC Republican | Examiner.com


----------



## Sawbriars

Now since many on here probably have no idea of what a vassal state is .....let me first define that..................A vassal state is any state that is subordinate to another. The vassal in these cases is the ruler, rather than the state itself. Being a vassal most commonly implies providing military assistance to the dominant state when requested to do so; it sometimes implies paying tribute, but a state which does so is better described as a tributary state. In simpler terms the vassal state would have to provide military power to the dominant state. Today, more common terms are puppet state, protectorate or associated state.




At this rate, America will soon be China?s vassal state | Thom Hartmann - News & info from the #1 progressive radio show


----------



## Sawbriars

So what will China do when we tell them we cannot repay them?


It?s Official: Federal Debt Will Never Be Paid | FrontPage Magazine


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> Now since many on here probably have no idea of what a vassal state is .....let me first define that..................]





Stop. Shut up. Everyone knows what it is. Time for you to go over to the Conspiracy Forum.


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> ......look for a military move on a island claimed by japan.....within 6 months....the Chinese are not adverse to a limited military action...in fact they crave one...to demonstrate their military capability...to show the great improvements they have been made.
> 
> In addition to wanting to demonstrate their military capability they want to humiliate Japan as well as the USA.





And when, after six months, that has not happened, will you finally STFU?


Well? Will you?


----------



## Unkotare

Sawbriars said:


> To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.






No, one needs more than just that. Have you ever so much as set foot in China?



Well? Have you?


----------



## Trajan

westwall said:


> This is where the fight will occur,
> 
> China ships in disputed waters: Japan coastguard | NDTV.com
> 
> and contrary to leftwingers opinion, China has been building a blue water navy for several years now.
> 
> These moves into the 'distant seas' would seem inevitable for a nation as large as China, he said. But it goes without saying that this expansion into blue waters is largely about countering the Pacific Fleet.
> 
> Chinas Xinhua news agency reported that a PLA Navy destroyer and two frigates exercising in the Western Pacific earlier this year were practicing maritime confrontation, open-sea mobile combat, law enforcement and open-sea naval commanding.
> 
> Make no mistake, the PLA Navy is focused on war at sea and about sinking an opposing fleet, Fanell said.
> 
> There is evidence that the PLA Navy has ambitions even beyond the Pacific.
> 
> Van Tol said China sent a frigate through the Suez Canal in 2011 to evacuate citizens during unrest in Libia, and Chinese ships have participated in anti-piracy efforts off the coast of Somalia."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China's naval aspirations: A 'blue-water' force - Stripes - Independent U.S. military news from Iraq, Afghanistan and bases worldwide



agreed, and this is not the only island chain or lump of rocks and islands they are looking to foist either. Last year they were most brazen in their push for the Spratly islands claimed and held by the Philippines. 

They moved a mile and half across the intl. Indian border in the Mount Gya area and have set up camp their as well. 

Anyone who thinks the PLA , though not a formal member as having a chair on the politburo nine means they don't have considerable heft, should reconsider. Chinas econ. is not well, they have issues big ones and have been skating for now propping it up, when that goes south, time tested and proven results in gov's like that,  is an exercise in uber nationalism.....always a great distraction.


----------



## Trajan

Unkotare said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, one needs more than just that. Have you ever so much as set foot in China?
> 
> 
> 
> Well? Have you?
Click to expand...


I have, whats your point?


----------



## Unkotare

Trajan said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> To understand China one only need take a cursory glance at history and how ascending nations inevitably use their military forces to enhance their dominance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, one needs more than just that. Have you ever so much as set foot in China?
> 
> 
> 
> Well? Have you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have, whats your point?
Click to expand...





I wasn't talking to you.


----------



## Trajan

so? 


what is your point?


----------



## Delta4Embassy

All militaries simulate conflicts with other countries. US has some tact about it though referring to other countries as 'Country Orange' and such.  But you cna't very well have wargames or exercises imagining a fight with aliens or monsters, you simulate real-world threats and potential threats. It isn't controversial.

If anything about this is interesting it's only the 'why bother' aspect. Japan isn't a military power by any stretch of the imagination. Their entire military could be defeated by the US Coast Guard.


----------



## Unkotare

Delta4Embassy said:


> Their entire military could be defeated by the US Coast Guard.





That's exaggerating the situation by a lot.


----------



## Vikrant

Unkotare said:


> Sawbriars said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is simply this...unless we have very strong leadership in Washington willing to maintain our military dominance in the Pacific we will eventually at best become a vassal state of China....the chinese already are beginning to realize we will never be able to repay the massive debt we have built up with them....thus already we see diplomtic efforts on their part to lease American land or industrial areas in America staffed by Chinese as a payback for all the money we owe them...such efforts now are being bandied about by the diplomats...(after all we have an official policy of diversity)eventually such requests may be handled by the Chinese Military and they will not be requests...they will demand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute nonsense.
Click to expand...


I agree. If a person does not pay his debt, it is not him who is in trouble, it's the lender who is in trouble. Same thing goes for the countries so if US does not pay its debt to China, it is China who is going to be in trouble not the US.


----------



## Sawbriars

The bitter reality of the Chinese Threat......few want to even hear about...especially in Washington...but Obama is shifting his focus to Asia at a snail like pace.

Bottom Line we have 3 very serious threats to our security....ever increasing threats as obama continues to work on his golf game.

Inside the Ring: China readies for 'short, sharp' war with Japan - Washington Times


----------



## Vikrant

China is looking for revenge. It is not willing to forgive and forget. Japanese are just beginning to realize that. This is why there is an effort on the part of Japanese government to forge better relations with countries like India and Vietnam who too are wary of increasing Chinese assertiveness in the region.


----------



## Sawbriars

Vikrant said:


> China is looking for revenge. It is not willing to forgive and forget. Japanese are just beginning to realize that. This is why there is an effort on the part of Japanese government to forge better relations with countries like India and Vietnam who too are wary of increasing Chinese assertiveness in the region.



I agree and all this has come about because of the utter failure of our foreign policy after the end of WWII.....Truman let China go communist....Eisenhower being toooo afraid of Russia allowed a stalemate in N.Korea and took no action against China for coming to the rescue of the N.Koreans....then LBJ/Nixon withdrawing from Vietnam after pursuing a stupid 'strategy' if one can even dignifty what they did with the word 'strategy'....then Nixon opening the door for China who then went on an economic rampage....that no one in Washington was able to foresee....then Clinton giving all of our nuclear secrets to China and allowing the N.Koreans to go Nuclear....not even to mention all the other failures in other parts of the world.


----------



## Moonglow

You left out Reagan and Bush I's push for most favored nation for trading with China...


----------



## Vikrant

At this stage, it is not clear if US is willing to anger China over Japan and Philippines even though both Japan and Philippines are staunch US allies. 

---

U.S. General Tells Japan, Philippines to Cool China Rhetoric - Bloomberg


----------



## Sawbriars

Moonglow said:


> You left out Reagan and Bush I's push for most favored nation for trading with China...



Yes...glad you mentioned that.  Essentially every administration since the end of WWII has been inept, and arrogant to the point of ignoring potential and real threats all the whilst helping everyone in the world and every minority in America whilst ignoring the traditional American Middle Class.


----------



## Sawbriars

Vikrant said:


> At this stage, it is not clear if US is willing to anger China over Japan and Philippines even though both Japan and Philippines are staunch US allies.
> 
> ---
> 
> U.S. General Tells Japan, Philippines to Cool China Rhetoric - Bloomberg



Nothing is clear about the current administration.....now someone must know what Obama is up to but certainly not the majority of the population.....coming in with a grandiose promise of 'transparency' this administration is going down as corrupt and very secretive and not even to mention how they are attacking traditional American Values aka free speech, and freeedom of religion amongst others.

One can only hope that someone with a lot of courage and insider knowledge will step forth and expose the mess in the White House and the sooner the better.


----------

