NationStates Jolt Archive

We have all heard about China's rapid economic growth, averaging 10% on average over the past decade, however it is accepted in practice that such growth can continue only so long before overheating occurs.

The Chinese government has been trying for quite a while to implement measures to curb growth in order to contain inflation and maintain strong economic conditions for the long term. This has been without success!

China is growing at an alarming rate and is dragging the global economy along for the ride. Over the next 20 years world shortages in steel and other mineral based products will push prices up. Increasing demand for oil is set to push barrels up to $42 US and beyond by the end of this decade.

When China finally overheats within the next decade and inflation begins to damage growth, it will result in global economic meltdown - far more reaching than the Great Depression of the 1930's.

What to do then?

On a further note, while only having an annual budget of $45 billion US, China this year alone will spend in excess of $75 billion US on military upgrades.

Inevitably, China will become expansionary. It is already importing raw materials and food at unsustainable levels and their debt is constantly on the up. No doubt they will be forced by economic necessity to expand.

Should the West be concerned? Perhaps the question is: will the USA step into Asia over the next decade to stop Chinese expansion?

This is why the west needs to groom Asian states like India and the ASEAN states- especially India, possibly the only nation which will have a hope of matching China's manpower advantage. Sooner or later, China will need to be stopped. Also, the Russians had bette get their act together- sooner or later, the Chinese are going to make a grab for Siberia.

the russians would kick their arse back to tibet

their govenrment may still be succesful at curbing their growth, the chinese premier said that their economy is like a speeding car and you have to apply the brakes slowly to avoid a crash

slam down too hard and youll spin out

On a further note, while only having an annual budget of $45 billion US, China this year alone will spend in excess of $75 billion US on military upgrades.

And the US is spending $400 billion a year. Therefore, the US is what 5 times bigger of a threat to other countries?

Inevitably, China will become expansionary. It is already importing raw materials and food at unsustainable levels and their debt is constantly on the up. No doubt they will be forced by economic necessity to expand.

So is the US in Iraq.

On a lighter note, no two countries with an established middle class (reflected by the presence of a McDonald's Chain) have EVER gone to war in the Modern Age. That leaves the only neighbors for China to invade are North Korea, Myanmar, and Laos, and no one will miss them anyway.

the russians would kick their arse back to tibet

their govenrment may still be succesful at curbing their growth, the chinese premier said that their economy is like a speeding car and you have to apply the brakes slowly to avoid a crash

slam down too hard and youll spin out

The problem is, the Chinese government has been trying to slow the economy down for many years. The economy just keeps speeding up.

The brakes have malfunctioned...wait a tick...(made in China).

On a further note, while only having an annual budget of $45 billion US, China this year alone will spend in excess of $75 billion US on military upgrades.

And the US is spending $400 billion a year. Therefore, the US is what 5 times bigger of a threat to other countries?

Inevitably, China will become expansionary. It is already importing raw materials and food at unsustainable levels and their debt is constantly on the up. No doubt they will be forced by economic necessity to expand.

So is the US in Iraq.

On a lighter note, no two countries with an established middle class (reflected by the presence of a McDonald's Chain) have EVER gone to war in the Modern Age. That leaves the only neighbors for China to invade are North Korea, Myanmar, and Laos, and no one will miss them anyway.

On military expansion...

China is unchallenged in Asia. Why increase heavy capital projects? Why desire a Blue Water Navy if they didn't plan mass expansion (Taiwan an obvious first conquest).

China does not have a middle class. 85% of Chinese citizens live in rural communities/villages. The largest city is Shanghi with 13 million people.

As for your comments about not missing a few little neighbouring countries...sounds familiar.

Czechoslovakia and Austria (ring a bell?)

Here's a little more reasoned assesment of what's happening (http://www.time.com/time/asia/features/china_cul_rev/middle_class.html), if a little condemning of the Culural Revolution.

Some of the highlights:

Private entrepreneurs profit richly from their carefully nurtured relationships with government officials, and a disproportionate number of China's newly wealthy are themselves former government or military officials, or their sons or daughters.

"City people have a better chance at success," he says. "Kids of government officials have a better chance at success."

Likewise, people frequently complain about the legal system, decrying its inequality....
... If a case arises between two normal people, then the law is powerful. But if one person is a company official or from the government, then forget it—there is no power in the law."

The CASS study notes that market reforms are widening the disparity, not closing it. In 1978, according to the report, the richest 20% of Chinese households were four times better off than the poorest. Today the richest have incomes 13 times greater than the poorest.

Seems like they've studied the US pretty well...

and this:
Elizabeth Economy, director of Asian studies and senior fellow at the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations
makes Max Berry nearly profitic...

By no means does the US have a claim to interfier with China's development in any other way than within our own economy. The biggest issue being that we will not be the only big dog on the block forever and we best start remembering that we are part of the world, not the unquestioned center of it.

DP

By no means does the US have a claim to interfier with China's development in any other way than within our own economy. The biggest issue being that we will not be the only big dog on the block forever and we best start remembering that we are part of the world, not the unquestioned center of it.

So what you are saying is the USA should let China's economy go into overdrive and cause global chaos which will more than likely bring about an international recession far greater than that experienced in the 1930's?

Also, you would support a militarily power China that could rival the USA for control of world trade and potentially control shipping lanes (especially oil routes)?

On a lighter note, no two countries with an established middle class (reflected by the presence of a McDonald's Chain) have EVER gone to war in the Modern Age. That leaves the only neighbors for China to invade are North Korea, Myanmar, and Laos, and no one will miss them anyway.

China doesn't have an established middle class.

And as for no one missing Myanmar and Laos (I agree with you abt N. Korea), I'm sorry but I find that sort of view to be exceedingly short sighted.

So when Myanmar and Laos go, what's next? Thailand and Vietnam? Then Singapore and Malaysia? Where does it stop?

By no means does the US have a claim to interfier with China's development in any other way than within our own economy. The biggest issue being that we will not be the only big dog on the block forever and we best start remembering that we are part of the world, not the unquestioned center of it.

So what you are saying is the USA should let China's economy go into overdrive and cause global chaos which will more than likely bring about an international recession far greater than that experienced in the 1930's?
Well, everyone lets us run rampant over the world economy. Until we are the United States of America and China, it's up to China what they should do.

Also, you would support a militarily power China that could rival the USA for control of world trade and potentially control shipping lanes (especially oil routes)?
Yep. Most of the reports I saw looking this article up placed India side by side in expansion, and the growing EU. It'll be far from a one or even two sided race. The more countries out there that are equable in power makes military power less of a tool of corrersion(sp). We either step up to a new way of dealing with other countries (lose the 'my way or the highway' routine) or go down fighting like every other attempt at empire. One way or another it's going to happen, we can't stop everybody from developing forever without it stretching us too far and pissing off to many so that when it does happen they take it out on us. We are not in charge of the world, nor should we be. Especially considering the judgment we've shown over the last four years.

Hope you can speak Chinese then.

Hope you can speak Chinese then.
Or Hindi, or French, or this could all be hysteria fueled by the realization that we've been unchecked on the world stage for too long and there is the fear that it all might come home to roost.

Sorry, man. I lived through the ass end of the cold war, I'm all brinkmaned out.

Yep. Most of the reports I saw looking this article up placed India side by side in expansion, and the growing EU. It'll be far from a one or even two sided race. The more countries out there that are equable in power makes military power less of a tool of corrersion(sp). We either step up to a new way of dealing with other countries (lose the 'my way or the highway' routine) or go down fighting like every other attempt at empire. One way or another it's going to happen, we can't stop everybody from developing forever without it stretching us too far and pissing off to many so that when it does happen they take it out on us. We are not in charge of the world, nor should we be. Especially considering the judgment we've shown over the last four years.

The trouble here is that the EU is composed of Liberal Democracies and India is a somewhat more conservative democracy. Thats fine.
China, however, has never really changed it's mentality. All the communist revolution did was to replace the Imperial dynasties with the Party. The Communist Party is simply one more 'dynasty' in the dynastic cycle. So do you really want to have a dictatorship with no concept of the Rule of Law dominating the world?

Or Hindi, or French, or this could all be hysteria fueled by the realization that we've been unchecked on the world stage for too long and there is the fear that it all might come home to roost.

I'm not an American and would shed no tears for (in fact would applaud) the loss of American hegemony. My concerns are for what would replace it. An Indo-European hegemony would be fine. A Chinese hegemony would not be.

Yep. Most of the reports I saw looking this article up placed India side by side in expansion, and the growing EU. It'll be far from a one or even two sided race. The more countries out there that are equable in power makes military power less of a tool of corrersion(sp). We either step up to a new way of dealing with other countries (lose the 'my way or the highway' routine) or go down fighting like every other attempt at empire. One way or another it's going to happen, we can't stop everybody from developing forever without it stretching us too far and pissing off to many so that when it does happen they take it out on us. We are not in charge of the world, nor should we be. Especially considering the judgment we've shown over the last four years.

The trouble here is that the EU is composed of Liberal Democracies and India is a somewhat more conservative democracy. Thats fine.
China, however, has never really changed it's mentality. All the communist revolution did was to replace the Imperial dynasties with the Party. The Communist Party is simply one more 'dynasty' in the dynastic cycle. So do you really want to have a dictatorship with no concept of the Rule of Law dominating the world?

I'm not an American and would shed no tears for the loss of American hegemony. My concerns are for what would replace it. An Indo-European hegemony would be fine. A Chinese hegemony would not be.
See, now-these countries aren't being run by gamers. Once a military is just big enough to have a good chance of winning a war doesn't mean that the first thing they're gonna do is go out and start a war. It just means a seat at the table. There is nothing to be gained from China trying to stomp on the rest of the world (if thier was, the US would be doin' it all the time. As it is we're having problems with countries much smaller), especially if there are three other large entities out there. Again, it just gets them a seat at the grown up table, I don't have problem with that-nor do I believe that it means that I'll 'have to learn Chinese...'. Hysterics.

Robust? pffft, theres nothing robust about them...

See, now-these countries aren't being run by gamers. Once a military is just big enough to have a good chance of winning a war doesn't mean that the first thing they're gonna do is go out and start a war. It just means a seat at the table. There is nothing to be gained from China trying to stomp on the rest of the world (if thier was, the US would be doin' it all the time. As it is we're having problems with countries much smaller), especially if there are three other large entities out there. Again, it just gets them a seat at the grown up table, I don't have problem with that-nor do I believe that it means that I'll 'have to learn Chinese...'. Hysterics.

The thing is, since China is heading for an economic meltdown, they will soon have an incentive to start a war.

Yep. Most of the reports I saw looking this article up placed India side by side in expansion, and the growing EU. It'll be far from a one or even two sided race. The more countries out there that are equable in power makes military power less of a tool of corrersion(sp). We either step up to a new way of dealing with other countries (lose the 'my way or the highway' routine) or go down fighting like every other attempt at empire. One way or another it's going to happen, we can't stop everybody from developing forever without it stretching us too far and pissing off to many so that when it does happen they take it out on us. We are not in charge of the world, nor should we be. Especially considering the judgment we've shown over the last four years.

The trouble here is that the EU is composed of Liberal Democracies and India is a somewhat more conservative democracy. Thats fine.
China, however, has never really changed it's mentality. All the communist revolution did was to replace the Imperial dynasties with the Party. The Communist Party is simply one more 'dynasty' in the dynastic cycle. So do you really want to have a dictatorship with no concept of the Rule of Law dominating the world?

I'm not an American and would shed no tears for the loss of American hegemony. My concerns are for what would replace it. An Indo-European hegemony would be fine. A Chinese hegemony would not be.
See, now-these countries aren't being run by gamers. Once a military is just big enough to have a good chance of winning a war doesn't mean that the first thing they're gonna do is go out and start a war. It just means a seat at the table. There is nothing to be gained from China trying to stomp on the rest of the world (if thier was, the US would be doin' it all the time. As it is we're having problems with countries much smaller), especially if there are three other large entities out there. Again, it just gets them a seat at the grown up table, I don't have problem with that-nor do I believe that it means that I'll 'have to learn Chinese...'. Hysterics.

Sounds like we have a sympathiser here! :shock: (where is McArthur when you need him aye?)

China's population, despite the introduction of the one child policy will still grow by 300,000,000 in the next 46 years.

They are already importing food at gross quantities and this will only go up with time.

You tell me...if you were Chinese would you:

(a) sit back and starve to death; or
(b) use the strong economic growth to build a massive navy and attack regional neighbours for land?

Tough choice that...die or invade...one really has to think about that one aye!

It will be like Nazi Germany all over again...

China will need lebensraum...as will our "friendly" (and worlds largest muslim) nation Indonesia.

God help us all.

See, now-these countries aren't being run by gamers. Once a military is just big enough to have a good chance of winning a war doesn't mean that the first thing they're gonna do is go out and start a war. It just means a seat at the table. There is nothing to be gained from China trying to stomp on the rest of the world (if thier was, the US would be doin' it all the time. As it is we're having problems with countries much smaller), especially if there are three other large entities out there. Again, it just gets them a seat at the grown up table, I don't have problem with that-nor do I believe that it means that I'll 'have to learn Chinese...'. Hysterics.

The thing is, since China is heading for an economic meltdown, they will soon have an incentive to start a war.
Thats just us and Germany that deal with economic downturn.
If the economic downturn and build up are so side by side, it really seems self correcting. I'm all hystericed out. I just can't bring myself to justify f'ing with another countries development without thinking that it leads to us training people to fight who will later use that training against us....

China's population, despite the introduction of the one child policy will still grow by 300,000,000 in the next 46 years.

They are already importing food at gross quantities and this will only go up with time.

You tell me...if you were Chinese would you:

(a) sit back and starve to death; or
(b) use the strong economic growth to build a massive navy and attack regional neighbours for land?

Tough choice that...die or invade...one really has to think about that one aye!

It will be like Nazi Germany all over again...

China will need lebensraum...as will our "friendly" (and worlds largest muslim) nation Indonesia.


I think you're overreacting about Indonesia (and the kneejerk muslim= bad comment is a bit silly). There's not much to fear on a large scale from Indonesia- their government couldn't organise a barfight let alone an invasion or Australia or SE Asia.

Anyway, this simply highlights the need to ensure that India rises to its potential power. We need a large, well-armed democracy in Asia and India is the best choice.

I do agree with you that China will need 'lebensraum'. Also they've got an upcoming sociological crisis- because of the one-child policy and the Chinese tendency to abort female foetuses and try again for male ones, the generation of Chinese now entering puberty has an overwhelming excess of males.
So economic crisis+sociological crisis+lack of resources= expansionist policies.

I think you're overreacting about Indonesia (and the kneejerk muslim= bad comment is a bit silly). There's not much to fear on a large scale from Indonesia- their government couldn't organise a barfight let alone an invasion or Australia or SE Asia.

Really? Well the invaded East Timor not that long ago...Malaysia and Indonesia were at war in the last decade (Australia and the Commonwealth intervened)...meanwhile Indonesia is laying claim to East Timor again and Papua New Gineau...

Also, Indonesia's population is already too high and the land cannot support any more people...In the next 46 years, Indonesia's population will rise by 110,000,000!

Meanwhile the President of Indonesia to be (will win in June) is wanted by the UN (they have a warrant for his arrest). Indonesian defence spending has skyroketed by 40% in the past few years. Recently they struck a deal with Russia for heavy arms.

Now...what was that about Indonesia not having its eye on expanding?

its funny that u mention that. The U.S. has invested a lot in Indonesia. Many U.S. factories are now located in Indonesia. The U.S. has also aided their military by giving them weapons and training Indonesian soldiers. Bravo President Bush! Bravo! :roll:

its funny that u mention that. The U.S. has invested a lot in Indonesia. Many U.S. factories are now located in Indonesia. The U.S. has also aided their military by giving them weapons and training Indonesian soldiers. Bravo President Bush! Bravo! :roll:

Not so. The USA has a ban on arms and munitions being exported to Indonesia. Hence they deal with Russia. Bush has not lifted this ban either.

US enterprise has invested a lot in Indonesia. Like GAP.

The American government's distrust of Indonesia is clearly visible by the placement of a US Carrier Battle Group off their coast. And it isn't for their protection!

India's main rival is Pakistan, not China. How many times in the last five years have India and Pakistan.

It will be at least 30 years before the chinese become a threat to the US.

its funny that u mention that. The U.S. has invested a lot in Indonesia. Many U.S. factories are now located in Indonesia. The U.S. has also aided their military by giving them weapons and training Indonesian soldiers. Bravo President Bush! Bravo! :roll:

Not so. The USA has a ban on arms and munitions being exported to Indonesia. Hence they deal with Russia. Bush has not lifted this ban either.

US enterprise has invested a lot in Indonesia. Like GAP.

The American government's distrust of Indonesia is clearly visible by the placement of a US Carrier Battle Group off their coast. And it isn't for their protection!

this is the current situation. it was quite different a year ago. the point is it happened.

its funny that u mention that. The U.S. has invested a lot in Indonesia. Many U.S. factories are now located in Indonesia. The U.S. has also aided their military by giving them weapons and training Indonesian soldiers. Bravo President Bush! Bravo! :roll:

Not so. The USA has a ban on arms and munitions being exported to Indonesia. Hence they deal with Russia. Bush has not lifted this ban either.

US enterprise has invested a lot in Indonesia. Like GAP.

The American government's distrust of Indonesia is clearly visible by the placement of a US Carrier Battle Group off their coast. And it isn't for their protection!

this is the current situation. it was quite different a year ago. the point is it happened.

It has been that way since Clinton!

It has been that way since Clinton!

Get ur Facts straight buddy!

accidentally voted yes so minus one vote. I'd have to say no. What we should do is keep them from blowing anyone up including us (usa) and hey we all benefit a bit from this, we won;t and don't from their whole crazy military shit they're up to

Wow, somebody's jealous.

Most of China's economic growth was provided by the USA. There are literally hundereds of square miles of General Motors, Ford, Boeing, Chrysler, etc. in China.

China, where the Government owns (or has a controlling interest in) the Factory.
China, where the Union Steward also works for the same government, and the only legal Labour Union is the one that also represents the Factory Owner.
In the West, this would be a conflict-of-interest, or it would be called "Communism", but what it really is, is Fascism.

Guess what, if you're a Factory worker, you get diddly-shit, and there's no recourse.

The American Government has (since GATT of 1972) paid for American Companies to relocate their production to-guess where? Yeah. China.

Interfere with their Economic development? We developed it for them!

If you're worried about a Chinese Economic Hegemony? well, it's too late.

Most of China's economic growth was provided by the USA. There are literally hundereds of square miles of General Motors, Ford, Boeing, Chrysler, etc. in China.

China, where the Government owns (or has a controlling interest in) the Factory.
China, where the Union Steward also works for the same government, and the only legal Labour Union is the one that also represents the Factory Owner.
In the West, this would be a conflict-of-interest, or it would be called "Communism", but what it really is, is Fascism.

Guess what, if you're a Factory worker, you get diddly-shit, and there's no recourse.

The American Government has (since GATT of 1972) paid for American Companies to relocate their production to-guess where? Yeah. China.

Interfere with their Economic development? We developed it for them!

If you're worried about a Chinese Economic Hegemony? well, it's too late. I thank them very much.

It has been that way since Clinton!

Get ur Facts straight buddy!

I cannot even THINK straight "buddy" :lol:

The Chinese don't need to do much, really. All they need to do are a few simple measures.
First, privatize their banks. While they are insolvent, the banks give genrously to questionable people. It is obvious that the government will loose big, and needs to dump those banks, now. Preferrably, they need foreign competitors, or even management, to ameliorate the losses the banks will surely have.
Second, they need to float the yuan. It is currently 40% undervalued to the dollar, considered one of the world's consistently stronger currencies. A strong yuan would mean that China has an easier time importing precious raw goods, and sustain their economy better when times get tough.
And third, Beijing needs to look at its priorities. Beijing is so confident that the Three Gorges Dam will work that they've made Chonqing separate from Chengdu and under direct control from Beijing only a few years back. They hope that the dam will make Chonqing an inland deepwater port, while supplying the city with electricity. Yet the reservior is so big that silt may flood the reservior area, and ultimatly block the channel to all but shallow-draft boats. There are other engineering projects across China that have questionable benefits Beijing is supporting, and they need to reevaluate them all.

What I find interesting is the way that Western nations are approaching the entire 'China emerging as a major power'.

Canada continues to provide China with millions of dollars in aid, despite the fact that China's economy is growing so strong. (Its probably stronger than Canada now)

The USA (particularly Bush) continue to give tax incentives to companies to invest in countries like China.

Seems to me like we're helping China along.

In any case this sounds reminiscent of the 'Japanese economy' worries a decade or two back. Everyone was so concerned about the Japanese economy overtaking the USA's and about growing Japanese influence on the US. Then, the Japanese economic bubble broke and it went down the tubes. Not that I'm saying the same thing will happen in China, but bear in mind that things can change very quickly.

1. Japan was smaller and easier to manage as a whole. That's not the case in China, where development is hugely imbalanced between the southeast and the northwest.

2. Japan didn't have to invest in a huge military machine, but China has and has the need to do so.

BUT

1. Japan had no raw materials of its own - huge import costs

2. China has a much larger supply of cheap labour than Japan does

3. Historically speaking, Chinese innovation and conservation is stronger than Japan's. How often do you see a Japanese firm reuse cooking oil salvaged from the drain? Or use hospital waste to make plastic bags? Or use the cheapest and dirtiest methods to produce table salt and vinegar? Or substitute high-quality MILK POWDER FOR BABIES into something that is worth less than water? If these innovative movements were translated to more positive aspects other than just making profit, I'm sure China will develop more and more technologies.

If the west is to survive both the usa abd europe we need to stop china NOW befor we end up with the fallout scenero (the game) :twisted:

Think for a moment... If China were to invade any neighboring country, would the UN just step aside? Or the EU? Or even the US? Or the Russians? No, if China wants a hope of imposing chinese hegemony on Asia they need to rethink a few things. Today, China has a military budget of 47 Billion, not exceedingly high for a developing nation. France, Germany, the UK and Japan all have budgets over 20 Billion. Japan alone tops 40 Billion. However, China is still in third place. Russia's military budget is 65 Billion, the second highest in the world. That brings us to the number one spot... The US. 400 Billion every single year. In just a few years, that budget pays for ALL of the materials used in WWII. ALL of them.
No, China is not the problem. They have one military advantage: manpower. Which is not so significant, as the US has the third largest population

Think for a moment... If China were to invade any neighboring country, would the UN just step aside? Or the EU? Or even the US? Or the Russians? No, if China wants a hope of imposing chinese hegemony on Asia they need to rethink a few things. Today, China has a military budget of 47 Billion, not exceedingly high for a developing nation. France, Germany, the UK and Japan all have budgets over 20 Billion. Japan alone tops 40 Billion. However, China is still in third place. Russia's military budget is 65 Billion, the second highest in the world. That brings us to the number one spot... The US. 400 Billion every single year. In just a few years, that budget pays for ALL of the materials used in WWII. ALL of them.
No, China is not the problem. They have one military advantage: manpower. Which is not so significant, as the US has the third largest population

We don't want to be hegemonous. That ideology was long gone since we now establish the fact that all persons are equal.

Sorry, Dragon's Bay, but ...

China imports a ton of natural resources, that is one reason why steel and other metals have become so expensive recently, China has been buying them all. In fact, a bridge project in my town has had to readjust our estimates for raw material costs upwards by a few hundred million because of soaring costs.

Japanese innovation and conservation are world renown. Japan holds the most patents per capita, and Japanese rarely to never discard items. Do Chinese people reuse milk from cereal bowls? Japanese people reuse practically everything. (I used to live there, that's how I know)

Japanese military (however small) is still one of the most well equiped and highest tech force out there. They may be small but that just means they can focus all their defence spending.

Think for a moment... If China were to invade any neighboring country, would the UN just step aside? Or the EU? Or even the US? Or the Russians? No, if China wants a hope of imposing chinese hegemony on Asia they need to rethink a few things. Today, China has a military budget of 47 Billion, not exceedingly high for a developing nation. France, Germany, the UK and Japan all have budgets over 20 Billion. Japan alone tops 40 Billion. However, China is still in third place. Russia's military budget is 65 Billion, the second highest in the world. That brings us to the number one spot... The US. 400 Billion every single year. In just a few years, that budget pays for ALL of the materials used in WWII. ALL of them.
No, China is not the problem. They have one military advantage: manpower. Which is not so significant, as the US has the third largest population

Incorrect. China's military budget this year has exceeded $75 billion US.

If you think for a minute that the UN would step in should China become outwardly ambitious, think again. A decision to send UN forces against China requires a unanimous vote by the UN Security Council.

Guess what...China is one of the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council. Naturally, China would veto any vote to send UN forces against themselves. So that counts the UN out.

The USA has one CVBG in northern Asia to protect Taiwan. Should that battle group be severely weakened, China would have a free arm in north Asia. With plans for carrier power and an ambitious blue water navy, China may very well force the USA out of Asian waters (no US carrier would ever be sent into waters guarded by numerous Chinese submarines). The question is as to whether the USA would launch ICBM's against China in response? Would the USA be so bold?

Think for a moment... If China were to invade any neighboring country, would the UN just step aside? Or the EU? Or even the US? Or the Russians? No, if China wants a hope of imposing chinese hegemony on Asia they need to rethink a few things. Today, China has a military budget of 47 Billion, not exceedingly high for a developing nation. France, Germany, the UK and Japan all have budgets over 20 Billion. Japan alone tops 40 Billion. However, China is still in third place. Russia's military budget is 65 Billion, the second highest in the world. That brings us to the number one spot... The US. 400 Billion every single year. In just a few years, that budget pays for ALL of the materials used in WWII. ALL of them.
No, China is not the problem. They have one military advantage: manpower. Which is not so significant, as the US has the third largest population

Incorrect. China's military budget this year has exceeded $75 billion US.

If you think for a minute that the UN would step in should China become outwardly ambitious, think again. A decision to send UN forces against China requires a unanimous vote by the UN Security Council.

Guess what...China is one of the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council. Naturally, China would veto any vote to send UN forces against themselves. So that counts the UN out.

The USA has one CVBG in northern Asia to protect Taiwan. Should that battle group be severely weakened, China would have a free arm in north Asia. With plans for carrier power and an ambitious blue water navy, China may very well force the USA out of Asian waters (no US carrier would ever be sent into waters guarded by numerous Chinese submarines). The question is as to whether the USA would launch ICBM's against China in response? Would the USA be so bold?
If you use Risk as your only model of international relations.....

What a load of pants.

So they are doing OK. Big deal. I don't see China imploding the world economy, it is actually doing great service to the rest of the world, which has outsourced much of its manufacturing industry to it. Paying more for oil and heavy metals? Big deal. If someone is that uncompetitive or tight-fisted that they don't feel like doing it, that's their problem, not China's.

China is not going to screw up the nice little outsourcing of global manufacturing industry thing it has going by invading Russia or SE Asia. Once it does that, it has no buyers, and it needs the buyers for its products. Nor are the US or Russia going to invade it any time soon, unless they are prepared to lose a man for every five they kill, and if forced into a corner, China can easily afford it.

No, what we are seeing is a new global industrial power emerging. And well done to them. I'm not going to buy into any of this Tom Clancy BS.

Well, I think that China will start becoming expansionist eventually, due to both economic and social pressures. China's economic might will allow it to gain better military and political power, which will lead to a cold war with the United States. Eventually, the EU, China, USA, and India will become the primary powers in the Third World War.

Eventually, the EU, China, USA, and India will become the primary powers in the Third World War.
Are you ready? I am. :D

Eventually, the EU, China, USA, and India will become the primary powers in the Third World War.
Are you ready? I am. :D
Don't get your hopes up. The US will cream you :wink: .

Eventually, the EU, China, USA, and India will become the primary powers in the Third World War.
Are you ready? I am. :D
I doubt that the USA and EU would be on opposite sides in a new World War. Can the EU even cut its absurd socialist spending enough to spend money on military expansion? :) Anyhow, by the time of WWIII, hopefully the USA will have amalgamated with the rest of North America. Anyhow, we Westerners (and the Indians) can all smash China together. Then we can fight eachother over whatever's left.

I doubt that the USA and EU would be on opposite sides in a new World War. Can the EU even cut its absurd socialist spending enough to spend money on military expansion? :) Anyhow, by the time of WWIII, hopefully the USA will have amalgamated with the rest of North America. Anyhow, we Westerners (and the Indians) can all smash China together. Then we can fight eachother over whatever's left.

Actually, you never know...

I doubt that the USA and EU would be on opposite sides in a new World War. Can the EU even cut its absurd socialist spending enough to spend money on military expansion? :) Anyhow, by the time of WWIII, hopefully the USA will have amalgamated with the rest of North America. Anyhow, we Westerners (and the Indians) can all smash China together. Then we can fight eachother over whatever's left.

Actually, you never know...
Of course, but I view it as more likely that we'd at least be reluctant allies in a common cause than outright adversaries.

Ok...back to China people!

Tactical Grace suggested that the Chinese will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :x

Ok...back to China people!

Tactical Grace suggested that the Chinese will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :x

Hitler had a very clear-cut expansionist policy: Lebensraum in the east.

China does not have an expansionist policy. It's only when idiots like various US presidents go power-hungry when their nation is satisfied and they're itching for something exciting to do when they go invade other people. China still has dozens of problems to solve. It isn't going to invade anybody anytime soon.

Ok...back to China people!

Tactical Grace suggested that the Chinese will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :x

Hitler had a very clear-cut expansionist policy: Lebensraum in the east.

China does not have an expansionist policy. It's only when idiots like various US presidents go power-hungry when their nation is satisfied and they're itching for something exciting to do when they go invade other people. China still has dozens of problems to solve. It isn't going to invade anybody anytime soon.

China will have a nett population growth of 400,000,000 in the next 46 years. It is already importing 33% of its food needs. Don't be so sure of that Dragons Bay.

Ok...back to China people!

Tactical Grace suggested that the Chinese will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :x

Hitler had a very clear-cut expansionist policy: Lebensraum in the east.

China does not have an expansionist policy. It's only when idiots like various US presidents go power-hungry when their nation is satisfied and they're itching for something exciting to do when they go invade other people. China still has dozens of problems to solve. It isn't going to invade anybody anytime soon.

China will have a nett population growth of 400,000,000 in the next 46 years. It is already importing 33% of its food needs. Don't be so sure of that Dragons Bay.

As an Aussie, China does not concern me at all.
I see the most likely scenario for future conflict being same as the last one, Indonesia, and similar scenario.
Merely substitute : New Guinea for East Timor, and roll the same settings.
And never mind 46 years, this will be within the next 10.
Vastly different peoples in terms of native population and administrators, mineral riches (gold, copper, diamonds, instead of East Timorese oil), a people that Australia basically abandoned to the Indonesians, rising nationalism and armed resistance among the native population- all the same ingredients are present. Add the Australian responsibility for a territory which we once administered, increased levels of tension between Australia and Indonesia over East Timor and the Bail bombings, and the emotional attachements ("fuzzy wuzzie angels" helping our troops on the Kokoda trail) and you have a powder keg ready to go.

he he........China

As an Aussie, China does not concern me at all.
I see the most likely scenario for future conflict being same as the last one, Indonesia, and similar scenario.
Merely substitute : New Guinea for East Timor, and roll the same settings.
And never mind 46 years, this will be within the next 10.
Vastly different peoples in terms of native population and administrators, mineral riches (gold, copper, diamonds, instead of East Timorese oil), a people that Australia basically abandoned to the Indonesians, rising nationalism and armed resistance among the native population- all the same ingredients are present. Add the Australian responsibility for a territory which we once administered, increased levels of tension between Australia and Indonesia over East Timor and the Bail bombings, and the emotional attachements ("fuzzy wuzzie angels" helping our troops on the Kokoda trail) and you have a powder keg ready to go.

Ok well:

1. We already know this - from another thread
2. That has nothing to do with China (please stay on topic)
3. Indonesia won't touch an inch of Aussie soil as long as the USA is around. However, just in case, Australia should start arming.
4. Back to China.

It seems to me that the US simply needs an enemy to focus its energies on. Nazi Germany pulled it out of the Depression, then the USSR and Communism were great, but suddenly it's in a vacuum. Japan was never credible, but the Arab world? China? I think the US is looking for a new strategic enemy. Someone it would not have to actually fight, but have a cold war with, so the vast military-industrial complex gets propped up. A classic example of a system in search of a problem to address, plenty of process without results.

It seems to me that the US simply needs an enemy to focus its energies on. Nazi Germany pulled it out of the Depression, then the USSR and Communism were great, but suddenly it's in a vacuum. Japan was never credible, but the Arab world? China? I think the US is looking for a new strategic enemy. Someone it would not have to actually fight, but have a cold war with, so the vast military-industrial complex gets propped up. A classic example of a system in search of a problem to address, plenty of process without results.

More defence spending :D Hurrah! Well I am not American, but Australian. There are some real threats in Asia for us, but China's threat is purely economic.

Though they will expand (into Asia) the problem is their overheating economy. Inflation is always a problem.

From The West Wing - We need a secret plan to fight inflation :lol:

Increasing demand for oil is set to push barrels up to $42 US and beyond
Damn...I wanted to buy a Nissan Armada...

Oh well beter get myself a Jetta TDI

someone suggested that the Chinese will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :x

someoneelse suggested that the USA will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :twisted:

Ok...back to China people!

Tactical Grace suggested that the Chinese will continue the way they are going and not risk expansion.

That's what Chamberlain said about Hitler...that Germany wasn't expansionist.

I doubt I need to remind you how that one turned out :x

Hitler had a very clear-cut expansionist policy: Lebensraum in the east.

China does not have an expansionist policy. It's only when idiots like various US presidents go power-hungry when their nation is satisfied and they're itching for something exciting to do when they go invade other people. China still has dozens of problems to solve. It isn't going to invade anybody anytime soon.

China will have a nett population growth of 400,000,000 in the next 46 years. It is already importing 33% of its food needs. Don't be so sure of that Dragons Bay.

LPB, China has enormous tracts of land in the west and north left undeveloped. China's huge political, economic and social apparati will need much more coordination than what it has today if it wants to orchestrate one mighty force to storm the world. I'm not saying that's not possible, but it won't be in the near future (ie. 10 - 15 years)

It seems to me that the US simply needs an enemy to focus its energies on. Nazi Germany pulled it out of the Depression, then the USSR and Communism were great, but suddenly it's in a vacuum. Japan was never credible, but the Arab world? China? I think the US is looking for a new strategic enemy. Someone it would not have to actually fight, but have a cold war with, so the vast military-industrial complex gets propped up. A classic example of a system in search of a problem to address, plenty of process without results.
Even if we are, we can't say that the Islamic Fundementalists never attacked us. We can't really say that about the USSR now can we?

Even if we are, we can't say that the Islamic Fundementalists never attacked us. We can't really say that about the USSR now can we?
Hmm . . . I don't think the terrorist threat the US faces is one that is best addressed through external military action. It is more of a job for domestic and international law enforcement agencies. Actually talking to people and sharing intelligence and stuff. Cooperation. Bombing failed states and converting them into failed states under new management isn't really a solution, it will probably end up backfiring.

Even if we are, we can't say that the Islamic Fundementalists never attacked us. We can't really say that about the USSR now can we?
Hmm . . . I don't think the terrorist threat the US faces is one that is best addressed through external military action. It is more of a job for domestic and international law enforcement agencies. Actually talking to people and sharing intelligence and stuff. Cooperation. Bombing failed states and converting them into failed states under new management isn't really a solution, it will probably end up backfiring.
Oh, but it'll help. Law enforcement is good, but it never really stops the problem. That is why the best way to deal with these guys is to take the fight from our streets to theirs, or so I feel.

Isn't there a rebel Islamic movement in one of China's western provinces?

I remember hearing this once or twice, and also remember hearing that several fighters from this group were caught in Pakistan during a shootout with Islamic militants of various nationalities.

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

China has so much the right to buy oil from the Middle East. What will anything make anyone think that only America and Europe enjoy the previlege?

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

China has so much the right to buy oil from the Middle East. What will anything make anyone think that only America and Europe enjoy the previlege?

No...it has nothing to do with the right. Next China will build a refinery in Iran. Then they will use this an excuse to build an offshore naval base and start patrolling the sea lanes - intimidating Western shipping.

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

China has so much the right to buy oil from the Middle East. What will anything make anyone think that only America and Europe enjoy the previlege?

No...it has nothing to do with the right. Next China will build a refinery in Iran. Then they will use this an excuse to build an offshore naval base and start patrolling the sea lanes - intimidating Western shipping.
More and more your logic seems to indicate that the rest of the world should be curbing the US, since the mere presence of military or economic strength immediately means that they start invading and taking over everything in sight.

wait for it...

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

China has so much the right to buy oil from the Middle East. What will anything make anyone think that only America and Europe enjoy the previlege?

No...it has nothing to do with the right. Next China will build a refinery in Iran. Then they will use this an excuse to build an offshore naval base and start patrolling the sea lanes - intimidating Western shipping.
More and more your logic seems to indicate that the rest of the world should be curbing the US, since the mere presence of military or economic strength immediately means that they start invading and taking over everything in sight.

Why curb the USA? I couldn't care less how imperialistic America gets. I just do not want the East to start running the show. Since the times of Ceasar, western civilisation has dominated the Earth. Western hegemony must be preserved at all cost...lest we be overrun and subjugated by the East (yes, slavery is still strong in many oriental nations).

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

China has so much the right to buy oil from the Middle East. What will anything make anyone think that only America and Europe enjoy the previlege?

No...it has nothing to do with the right. Next China will build a refinery in Iran. Then they will use this an excuse to build an offshore naval base and start patrolling the sea lanes - intimidating Western shipping.

BAH! so what? america has enough ships and bases around China's coast to start a naval blockade of China, that is, if they're willing to start a third world war. America's just jealous that the China has friendly ties with the Middle East. :roll:

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

China has so much the right to buy oil from the Middle East. What will anything make anyone think that only America and Europe enjoy the previlege?

No...it has nothing to do with the right. Next China will build a refinery in Iran. Then they will use this an excuse to build an offshore naval base and start patrolling the sea lanes - intimidating Western shipping.

BAH! so what? america has enough ships and bases around China's coast to start a naval blockade of China, that is, if they're willing to start a third world war. America's just jealous that the China has friendly ties with the Middle East. :roll:

The USA has 1 CVBG in China's sphere...if China put some submarines out there, they could push the USA back out of Asia.

The USA has 1 CVBG in China's sphere...if China put some submarines out there, they could push the USA back out of Asia.
What's CVBG? Let's count the US allies surrounding China's coast. Beyond the Yellow Sea we have South Korea and Japan. Across the Taiwan Strait there sits the rebellious and separatists Taipei government. The South China Sea is blocked by the Philippines and Singapore. And not on the coast we have, in the southwest, the not-so-friendly communist Vietnam and massive India over the Himalayas. China is basically surrounded with potential enemies.

The Chinese navy is in many ways on the brink of collapse, take for example the tragic accident that killed the entire crew of one sub a few years back. The accident was caused because they were still using WW I style submarines (for training of course). And their actual subs are worse than the Canadian subs (if you're from Canada you'll get this...lol).

China only has friendly relations with the Middle East because it hasn't become involved in the politics there yet. Be sure that once they do become involved, everyone will hate them as much as they hate the US. actually, China is not on such friendly terms with countries like Pakistan.

Maybe another reason some Middle Eastern nations like China is because they see them as a potential successor to world power status if the US should fall.

About the pipeline, why is it a bad thing? So the Chinese can buy more fuel, and help their economy out a little bit. The US has had oil pipelines all over the world for a long time.

Actually I read that there is going to be an attempt to create a trans-Asia roadway. It will go from Japan all the way to Turkey.

The Chinese navy is in many ways on the brink of collapse, take for example the tragic accident that killed the entire crew of one sub a few years back. The accident was caused because they were still using WW I style submarines (for training of course). And their actual subs are worse than the Canadian subs (if you're from Canada you'll get this...lol).

China only has friendly relations with the Middle East because it hasn't become involved in the politics there yet. Be sure that once they do become involved, everyone will hate them as much as they hate the US. actually, China is not on such friendly terms with countries like Pakistan.

Maybe another reason some Middle Eastern nations like China is because they see them as a potential successor to world power status if the US should fall.

About the pipeline, why is it a bad thing? So the Chinese can buy more fuel, and help their economy out a little bit. The US has had oil pipelines all over the world for a long time.

Actually I read that there is going to be an attempt to create a trans-Asia roadway. It will go from Japan all the way to Turkey.

The Chinese navy is, if anything, NOT about to collapse. Some of their ships just visited Hong Kong. Now I've not seen them personally, so I don't qualify to make hard comparisons, but I don't think it's on the "verge of collapse".

And therefore China will play it smart and don't meddle with affairs in the Middle East. I think Beijing is rather happy to see the West bogged down in the Middle East. Do that, and America will become less and less involved in East Asian affairs. China will then become the "big brother" in East Asia. Currently we don't want much: Taiwan, the Spratlys, Diaoyu Islands, maybe Mongolia. China is on good terms with Pakistan, just not India.

Actually, I'm beginning to think building an oil pipeline isn't going to help China. Oil is becoming more and more expensive, and what China should do is to finish up its Three Gorges Dam project as soon as possible, so it can have so much more power reserves it needs to rely less on coal and oil - sustainable development.

There is such an attempt between China and Turkey, popularly dubbed the "New Silk Road".

Of course, I have to admit there are truckloads of problems China needs to solve to really emerge as superpower. However, there is no doubt that with the new central leadership, China will begin to transform in a nice way for the betterment of the world...ahem...or just China herself.

Aren't China, India and Pakistan all arguing about the Kashmir region? I know that all three have seized parts and India and Pakistan want it all. With Pakistan being a US ally and India being hostile to both the US and China it seems like a three way hatefest... but I might be wrong.

The Chinese navy does not get the funding it needs to be a threat. The subs are leaky and shouldn't be allowed out of dock (this I know for sure).

Sooner or later China will get involved in Middle East politics, because it will need oil more and more as its economy booms.

Actually now the US is thinking about moving some of its troops from South Korea to the Iraqi conflict. But since I don't think Bush is going to be re-elected I think the US will start pulling its troops out of Iraq fairly soon (maybe as soon as there is an elected government).

Actually, Pakistan and India are arguing about Kashmir; China and India arguing about Askai Chin, and Pakistan and China are arguing about some non-descript Himalayan strip. Personally I don't see the fuss - GUYS, IT'S AN INFERTILE MOUNTAIN REGION! Maybe they have some sort of military advantage or something, that India fears that Chinese troops will pour across the border to New Delhi if those mountains were seized and vice versa.

The Chinese navy...I can't argue anything with you about the Chinese navy. I know nothing about the Chinese navy. :roll: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Most Chinese power stations use coal or nuclear fission, not oil. Oil is more like an industrial resource. Once the Three Gorges Dam Project is completed it is reputed to be able to produce 17680MW of electricity, which is, frankly, a lot. Then the consumption of oil for power-generation will curb to about nothing, and I hope by that time the issues of several South China Sea islands can be solved and oil be extracted from those places.

I read about the South Korea issue. Actually, I am writing a plot in which Japan incites serious riots in Iraq so the United States will shift the Seventh Fleet over to Iraq - giving her a free hand of expansion in China - again. :wink: Well, I don't mean to be offensive, just that plots can take me anywhere. :oops: :P

I read about the South Korea issue. Actually, I am writing a plot in which Japan incites serious riots in Iraq so the United States will shift the Seventh Fleet over to Iraq - giving her a free hand of expansion in China - again. :wink: Well, I don't mean to be offensive, just that plots can take me anywhere. :oops: :P

Ok, well I strongly recommend people read Patrick Robinson's "The Shark Mutiny" and the other books in the series. This particular book however is scary because China is virtually following its plot. HAHA maybe the book gave them the idea!

Anyway, a good read nonetheless.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but Dragons Bay...that idea has already been done. Though it is China that causes the USA to take their carrier to the Gulf from Taiwan --> China taking Taiwan.

Really it is a great read.

I read about the South Korea issue. Actually, I am writing a plot in which Japan incites serious riots in Iraq so the United States will shift the Seventh Fleet over to Iraq - giving her a free hand of expansion in China - again. :wink: Well, I don't mean to be offensive, just that plots can take me anywhere. :oops: :P

Ok, well I strongly recommend people read Patrick Robinson's "The Shark Mutiny" and the other books in the series. This particular book however is scary because China is virtually following its plot. HAHA maybe the book gave them the idea!

Anyway, a good read nonetheless.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but Dragons Bay...that idea has already been done. Though it is China that causes the USA to take their carrier to the Gulf from Taiwan --> China taking Taiwan.

Really it is a great read.

I read about the South Korea issue. Actually, I am writing a plot in which Japan incites serious riots in Iraq so the United States will shift the Seventh Fleet over to Iraq - giving her a free hand of expansion in China - again. :wink: Well, I don't mean to be offensive, just that plots can take me anywhere. :oops: :P

Ok, well I strongly recommend people read Patrick Robinson's "The Shark Mutiny" and the other books in the series. This particular book however is scary because China is virtually following its plot. HAHA maybe the book gave them the idea!

Anyway, a good read nonetheless.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but Dragons Bay...that idea has already been done. Though it is China that causes the USA to take their carrier to the Gulf from Taiwan --> China taking Taiwan.

Really it is a great read.

Oooh, I once wrote a story about how two brothers were separated between America and Germany just before World War II. The American ends up in Germany as a POW, and his brother rescues him and they all go to Switzerland. I never got round to get it published and things, but then I read a novel which follows the similar storyline. Hahahahaha. oh well.

Ideas can sometimes repeat. Who cares? How many spy novels of the Cold War have people written? I will try to locate the book and read it. Thanks. :)

Your welcome...

I wrote a series of books where there is this bad guy in a black helmut and he uses a thing called the force... :lol: joking :wink:

Serious though...I prefer non fictional writing...and I did write 4 short stories on here in the General Forum.

I love writing...

So do the Chinese :twisted: crafty buggers.

Canada and Denmark are arguing about some tiny ice covered uninhabitable island between Greenland and Baffin Island....

China doesn't need oil for power, neither does Canada or most of the USA, we use it for cars and plastic. Both of which will soon be in demand in China.

Would China become involved in N. Korea though? I mean, if it looked like Pyongyang was seriously considering a military adventure intothe south... would China get involved? and on which side?

Your welcome...

I wrote a series of books where there is this bad guy in a black helmut and he uses a thing called the force... :lol: joking :wink:

Serious though...I prefer non fictional writing...and I did write 4 short stories on here in the General Forum.

I love writing...

So do the Chinese :twisted: crafty buggers.

I can do both fiction and non-fiction writing - depends what kind of topics. I tried to write a book on meteorology and the history of hong kong. both failed terribly. hahahaha

I didn't get your last comment. You can be honest here. You're too far away for me to strangle you. :wink:

This topic has got even more absurd since I posted.

Honestly, a country does its best to work its way out of the dirt, and as soon as it looks as though it might achieve a decent standard of living for a reasonable proportion of its population, it is an OMG THREAT!!! to the Western (read, white) economic hegemony. Christ, someone even mentioned that their culture might impose slavery on everyone else. :roll:

I have read a lot of paperback sh*t in my time about Oriental plots to take over the world, and I simply cannot see this happening. The scenarios that are described here would require the USA and China to decide that mutual genocide is the best policy, in the hope that someone prevails. Come on. China is making too much money from real honest trade to start screwing around with WW3, and the US will be fighting and getting pulped by Iran and/or some other ME Gulf state well before anything like that ever has a chance of happening.

This topic has got even more absurd since I posted.

Honestly, a country does its best to work its way out of the dirt, and as soon as it looks as though it might achieve a decent standard of living for a reasonable proportion of its population, it is an OMG THREAT!!! to the Western (read, white) economic hegemony. Christ, someone even mentioned that their culture might impose slavery on everyone else. :roll:

I have read a lot of paperback sh*t in my time about Oriental plots to take over the world, and I simply cannot see this happening. The scenarios that are described here would require the USA and China to decide that mutual genocide is the best policy, in the hope that someone prevails. Come on. China is making too much money from real honest trade to start screwing around with WW3, and the US will be fighting and getting pulped by Iran and/or some other ME Gulf state well before anything like that ever has a chance of happening.

Calm down, TG. Fiction can have anything happen. :) I'm certainly not trying to suggest that this will happen, but I think it's okay to let imagination take control of my life at some points.

This topic has got even more absurd since I posted.

Honestly, a country does its best to work its way out of the dirt, and as soon as it looks as though it might achieve a decent standard of living for a reasonable proportion of its population, it is an OMG THREAT!!! to the Western (read, white) economic hegemony. Christ, someone even mentioned that their culture might impose slavery on everyone else. :roll:

I have read a lot of paperback sh*t in my time about Oriental plots to take over the world, and I simply cannot see this happening. The scenarios that are described here would require the USA and China to decide that mutual genocide is the best policy, in the hope that someone prevails. Come on. China is making too much money from real honest trade to start screwing around with WW3, and the US will be fighting and getting pulped by Iran and/or some other ME Gulf state well before anything like that ever has a chance of happening.

And Hitler wasn't going to risk the strong German economy in the late 1930's either...need I say more. History repeats itself.

Also, could we please cut back on the swearing. I've known mods to come down on nations for that and I think as the enforcers of such rules the same standards should apply (if not higher) for moderators.

Keep it clean ok. I find all measures of swearing to be degrading and unecessary. There are better ways of expressing one's self.

There seems to be a belief in the first quoted paragraph that China deserves to be economically strong. I will make one thing clear and that is nobody deserves anything. You obtain things through two methods in this world:

1. Hard work.
2. Taking by force. (mankind's preferred option)

The West must protect itself against nations like China. Western hegemony must be preserved at all cost. Whether you agree with this or not is irrelevent. When push comes to shove, in the end when the west are left with the choice of accepting China as an equal nation as opposed to putting a stop to their rise to power - it will be the latter we choose. This has been the way of things for over 2000 years and it isn't going to change now.

Why should western civilisation share the wealth? Why should we allow other nations to prosper while people in our countries go without jobs and suffer falling living standards?

If anyone wishes to use the "its humane" argument, then please consider that if you asked most people in western nations they would say the plight of African people is terrible. If you then asked them for money to help the starving in Uganda most of those asked would decline. That is the measure of our compassion.

And Hitler wasn't going to risk the strong German economy in the late 1930's either...need I say more. History repeats itself.
Yes, you need to say more. That people have said the same thing is the only connection you've made. This may seem like an argument, but it's really just a stretch.

There seems to be a belief in the first quoted paragraph that China deserves to be economically strong. I will make one thing clear and that is nobody deserves anything. You obtain things through two methods in this world:

1. Hard work.

That's the one China used.
2. Taking by force. (mankind's preferred option)

The West must protect itself against nations like China. Western hegemony must be preserved at all cost. Whether you agree with this or not is irrelevent. When push comes to shove, in the end when the west are left with the choice of accepting China as an equal nation as opposed to putting a stop to their rise to power - it will be the latter we choose. This has been the way of things for over 2000 years and it isn't going to change now.
Or they'll exploit a big-ass new market.

Why should western civilisation share the wealth? Why should we allow other nations to prosper while people in our countries go without jobs and suffer falling living standards?
Mostly because fostering the new market will create opportunities and jobs within our own economy, more than would be created by squashing this.

If anyone wishes to use the "its humane" argument, then please consider that if you asked most people in western nations they would say the plight of African people is terrible. If you then asked them for money to help the starving in Uganda most of those asked would decline. That is the measure of our compassion.
Wait, we do ask, and people do contribute.

I can't believe that Dragon's Bay hasn't called you on the western hegemony thing yet. Ah well, it's not my national battle. I'll start him off: the west wouldn't be anywhere near what it is if it hadn't been for China's influence.

I can't believe that Dragon's Bay hasn't called you on the western hegemony thing yet. Ah well, it's not my national battle. I'll start him off: the west wouldn't be anywhere near what it is if it hadn't been for China's influence.

OF COURSE! :shock: man, can you imagine a world without paper? printing? compass? etc. etc. etc.

LPB: YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS! :evil:

I can't believe that Dragon's Bay hasn't called you on the western hegemony thing yet. Ah well, it's not my national battle. I'll start him off: the west wouldn't be anywhere near what it is if it hadn't been for China's influence.

OF COURSE! :shock: man, can you imagine a world without paper? printing? compass? etc. etc. etc.

LPB: YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS! :evil:

Jealous? <sits back in leather chair amid private study furnished in oak>

I doubt it haha :lol:

Yes, China influenced western growth enormously...now China should go back to being poor...so the west may continue being powerful and rule the world (mainly the USA).

I do not see what is so wrong with that.

Why should western civilisation share the wealth? Why should we allow other nations to prosper while people in our countries go without jobs and suffer falling living standards?
Mostly because fostering the new market will create opportunities and jobs within our own economy, more than would be created by squashing this.

No, jobs move overseas. Manufacturing leaves western economies and with it, most of the wealth.

The argument is that western economies should become the thinkers (high tech) and become service based. Services merely recycle old money and do not create wealth of any significance. Being high tech has yet to be adequately defined, and with nations like China getting all the manufacturing, through the wealth they will create in a short period they will develop their own thinkers and high tech industries...

That leaves the west without jobs now and even more so in the future. We become degraded to the status of tourist resorts.

Jealous? <sits back in leather chair amid private study furnished in oak>

I doubt it haha :lol:

Yes, China influenced western growth enormously...now China should go back to being poor...so the west may continue being powerful and rule the world (mainly the USA).

I do not see what is so wrong with that.

haha. that's exactly what you're afraid of, that one day China will zoom in and snatch your leather chair and your private study furnished in oak. Too bad. Go with the flow. Personally, opening China up will actually mean the decline of Hong Kong. We all have to adapt to the changing cirucumstances. You stop, you are out.

The West must protect itself against nations like China. Western hegemony must be preserved at all cost. Whether you agree with this or not is irrelevent. When push comes to shove, in the end when the west are left with the choice of accepting China as an equal nation as opposed to putting a stop to their rise to power - it will be the latter we choose. This has been the way of things for over 2000 years and it isn't going to change now.

Why should western civilisation share the wealth? Why should we allow other nations to prosper while people in our countries go without jobs and suffer falling living standards?
Charming. I will just sit back and watch the West get its [self-censored] kicked when it tries to do it. And something tells me the West will hardly be unanimous on this issue "when push comes to shove". Certainly much of it will be supporting such ideas in spirit, leaving the pain to someone else. And it sure as hell is not going to be Europe. :P

The West must protect itself against nations like China. Western hegemony must be preserved at all cost. Whether you agree with this or not is irrelevent. When push comes to shove, in the end when the west are left with the choice of accepting China as an equal nation as opposed to putting a stop to their rise to power - it will be the latter we choose. This has been the way of things for over 2000 years and it isn't going to change now.

Why should western civilisation share the wealth? Why should we allow other nations to prosper while people in our countries go without jobs and suffer falling living standards?
Charming. I will just sit back and watch the West get its [self-censored] kicked when it tries to do it. And something tells me the West will hardly be unanimous on this issue "when push comes to shove". Certainly much of it will be supporting such ideas in spirit, leaving the pain to someone else. And it sure as hell is not going to be Europe. :P

Europe has enjoyed many years of peace and is starting to relax. When another global war breaks out, everything will change...again.

Jealous? <sits back in leather chair amid private study furnished in oak>

I doubt it haha :lol:

Yes, China influenced western growth enormously...now China should go back to being poor...so the west may continue being powerful and rule the world (mainly the USA).

I do not see what is so wrong with that.

haha. that's exactly what you're afraid of, that one day China will zoom in and snatch your leather chair and your private study furnished in oak. Too bad. Go with the flow. Personally, opening China up will actually mean the decline of Hong Kong. We all have to adapt to the changing cirucumstances. You stop, you are out.

Yes...the changing circumstances. When another world war erupts, that will be irrelevent. Every time we have had a major war, nations went back to being protectionist.

Europe has enjoyed many years of peace and is starting to relax. When another global war breaks out, everything will change...again.
Perhaps so. If a third world war comes, I am pretty sure Europe and the US will be on opposite sides.

Europe has enjoyed many years of peace and is starting to relax. When another global war breaks out, everything will change...again.
Perhaps so. If a third world war comes, I am pretty sure Europe and the US will be on opposite sides.

Not so. Europe and the USA will side together. The next world war will be West versus East. Just because there are disagreements over Iraq, you will find that once the EU's sovereignty is threatened, they will team up with the yanks.

Not so. Europe and the USA will side together. The next world war will be West versus East. Just because there are disagreements over Iraq, you will find that once the EU's sovereignty is threatened, they will team up with the yanks.
Our sovereignty. Threatened. By the Chinese. Same as it was with Japan a while back.

I regret to say, in the absence of anything other than wild assertions, this worldview of yours seems to be founded more in race issues than anything else.

ARGH! CHINA WILL NOT BECOME MILITANT AT ALL IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS!

so far, 36 people have voted no, and 13 have voted yes.

(wonders how many of those 36 are bitching about "outsourcing"...)

so far, 36 people have voted no, and 13 have voted yes.

(wonders how many of those 36 are bitching about "outsourcing"...)
Most of that (the white-collar stuff anyway) is going to India, actually.

Not so. Europe and the USA will side together. The next world war will be West versus East. Just because there are disagreements over Iraq, you will find that once the EU's sovereignty is threatened, they will team up with the yanks.
Our sovereignty. Threatened. By the Chinese. Same as it was with Japan a while back.

I regret to say, in the absence of anything other than wild assertions, this worldview of yours seems to be founded more in race issues than anything else.

Agree fully.
Let me assure that all Australians do not have such a racially-blinkered view, despite the worst attentions of the present Australian government.
Most of us see far more problems and dangers in our misnamed "free trade agreement" (read one-sided sell-out) with the US.
And the more educated Australians are gradually beginning to realise that Australia is actually situated in Asia, not off the coast of either the US or Britain.
China represents opportunities as a trading partner, not threats to "western" versus "eastern" values.

Interesting development. Today it was announced that China will be building an oil pipeline across Asia to the Middle East.

Meanwhile, Australia and other nations face a real here-and-now threat of inflation as a direct result of rising oil prices, as a direct result of the American's ham-fisted middle East adventurism.

The US is a greater threat to Australia's economy than is China, India, and both Koreas combined.