NationStates Jolt Archive

ok this has puzzled me, how are america and china not at war!? with china pratically keeping americas economy goin 4 years america turns around and says devalue your currency basically to reduce their debt. china want taiwan back and said that they could use force and america will defend taiwan if it is invaded! the only reason i can think that it hasnt happend yet is because america realises how large the chinese army is and now the fact tht china have signed a treaty with russia and the 4 "Stan's"

War is usually bad for business, and business between China and the US is good.

Money and corporations is far, far more important than countries and religions.

The danger is the main reason. Like with the USSR.

well for one... they aren't shooting the crap out of eachother

well for one... they aren't shooting the crap out of eachother
wow your clever!!
and extremly funny it would seem!

War is usually bad for business, and business between China and the US is good.

Money and corporations is far, far more important than countries and religions.

Amen, brother.

Like Deep Kimchi said, we love each other at the moment because we're both really huge trading partners. Plus, we probably don't know whether or not we'll win. China may have a huge army. But it's nowhere near as high tech as America yet. As much as some people say that America's military isn't doing so well in Iraq, they're forgetting that that is a fight against insurgents. In a stand up World War II/ Red Dawn style of fight, we'd probably own them.

It would be extremely difficult, not to mention self-defeating, for either side to engage in a shooting war with the other.

I imagine the US and China will spend the next thirty years going around the globe causing diplomatic problems for each other, while at the same time retaining normal trade relations.

Eventually, everyone will loose interest, and people will move onto something else.

Anyway, I for one, welcome our new chinese overlords. At least they know how to deal with civil disobedience.

ok this has puzzled me, how are america and china not at war!? with china pratically keeping americas economy goin 4 years america turns around and says devalue your currency basically to reduce their debt. china want taiwan back and said that they could use force and america will defend taiwan if it is invaded! the only reason i can think that it hasnt happend yet is because america realises how large the chinese army is and now the fact tht china have signed a treaty with russia and the 4 "Stan's"

The reason it hasn't happened is like someone said in a previous post its bad for business....and the fact that China has 200+million troops(with reserves included) to Americas 1.4million.

ok this has puzzled me, how are america and china not at war!? with china pratically keeping americas economy goin 4 years america turns around and says devalue your currency basically to reduce their debt. china want taiwan back and said that they could use force and america will defend taiwan if it is invaded! the only reason i can think that it hasnt happend yet is because america realises how large the chinese army is and now the fact tht china have signed a treaty with russia and the 4 "Stan's"
No, the US isn't afraid of China's huge military. China's military is basically incapable of moving past China's borders. Their navy and air force are a joke and can't move people or equipment for an invasion.

We're not at war because China's a big trading partner and because each of us has nuclear weapons capable of reaching the other.

War with a country of 1.5 billion people = bad idea.

The US can't win in Iraq, with a population of 11 mil and a shabby economy. What are the chances they'd defeat China(without nukes)?

War is usually bad for business, and business between China and the US is good.

Until China unpins its currency from the dollar.

War is usually bad for business, and business between China and the US is good.
Money and corporations is far, far more important than countries and religions.
At the same time, war can benefit corporations, although that would only be applicable to the defense industries.

Because one dare not throw the first punch?

They are interdependent economically. The dollar would have been dead long ago if china was not constantly investing in it. On the other side, china needs america to sell all its goods to. Both would die in the war. Also there is the fact that although the US are war mongerours, they would be foolish to attack china's army. Remember the korean war? We saw a glimpse of what the limitless manpower of china can do there.

War with a country of 1.5 billion people = bad idea.

The US can't win in Iraq, with a population of 11 mil and a shabby economy. What are the chances they'd defeat China(without nukes)?
As I said before, in Iraq, we're facing a foe with virtually no recognizable leadership that we can force to surrender. Oh, and we did defeat Iraq. We are in fact allied to Iraq, or at least friendly. Who we are fighting are not under the control of the government of Iraq(at least, I don't think so...), we are fighting insurgents from around the world.

War with a country of 1.5 billion people = bad idea.

The US can't win in Iraq, with a population of 11 mil and a shabby economy. What are the chances they'd defeat China(without nukes)?

Very true, just like when the Macedonians thought they would invade persia. They were so outnumbered their effort was doomed from the outset. No wonder they failed.....

Very true, just like when the Macedonians thought they would invade persia. They were so outnumbered their effort was doomed from the outset. No wonder they failed.....

Yay Macedonians! (does the Macedonian Dance)

Seriously though, tell me you aren't comparing the Shrub to Alexander the Great.

Very true, just like when the Macedonians thought they would invade persia. They were so outnumbered their effort was doomed from the outset. No wonder they failed.....
It's a matter of what you're willing to do.
We could have done what the Mongols did in 1254. I'm sure that we wouldn't have an insurgency, at least not in the Baghdad environs, if we had done what they did after taking the city.

Very true, just like when the Macedonians thought they would invade persia. They were so outnumbered their effort was doomed from the outset. No wonder they failed.....

Which time do you mean? Because if you're talking about Alexander the Great, they did conquer Persia. But if you're talking about his dad... then ya you're right. Another thing you can look at is Russia vs. Germany. Besides the fact that Russia was barely held with the massive lend lease program from America and since the Germans made some pretty dumb mistakes. Seriously, I'd bet on America winning if you're just focused on a military point of view.

They both have a lot to lose in war. Meanwhile peace has been pretty good.

They are interdependent economically. The dollar would have been dead long ago if china was not constantly investing in it. On the other side, china needs america to sell all its goods to. Both would die in the war. Also there is the fact that although the US are war mongerours, they would be foolish to attack china's army. Remember the korean war? We saw a glimpse of what the limitless manpower of china can do there.
Overyly simplistic but basically correct. China does buy up a lot of American debt, but almost everything they make they sell to us. If either economy collapsed the other would as well. China would lose its market and its foreign holdings accounts would be worthless. The US shipped its manufacturing base to China so we would have a rough time manufacturing the goods and services we need without China. Chinese businesses get huge infusions of cash from American investors....

It's all tangled and shit but it's kind of like our economies, and those of Europe and Japan, have been playing naked twister. If any economy gets too weak, including any major European economy, the whole pile can fall down in a delicious orgy of naked skin and sex oils.

They are interdependent economically. The dollar would have been dead long ago if china was not constantly investing in it. On the other side, china needs america to sell all its goods to. Both would die in the war. Also there is the fact that although the US are war mongerours, they would be foolish to attack china's army. Remember the korean war? We saw a glimpse of what the limitless manpower of china can do there.
I wouldn't be too confident of China's conventional military power. Back then the US didn't have anywhere near the level of technology it has now. Since then we've made fighting numerically superior forces the focus of our military effort. We expected to fight massive numbers of Soviet troops and tanks with the limited number of US troops and tanks stationed in Western Europe.

why should china fight with the usa when they can merely take it over through political moves(supporting countries like iran that are a thorn in our side and we spend enormous manpower and political power to handle), economic moves(using their vast material and human resources to outmuscle america), and general ideology(the chinese man has been brought up to always obey, provide for the nation's glory, and never question policies; meanwhile the american man is taught to reason, question the world, provide for himself and family)?

It scares me to say it, because I dont want it to happen, but america will not be a superpower much longer... this century is in China's hands

Yay Macedonians! (does the Macedonian Dance)

Seriously though, tell me you aren't comparing the Shrub to Alexander the Great.

No, I am just pointing out that numbers alone tell only a relatively small part of the story. (As other posters no doubt support).

Like Kimchi said, it all depends on what you are willing to do, and how well prepared you are to do it.

And just because you have overwhelming numbers on your side doesn't mean that you will score a smashing victory either, as the persians found out at Marathon.

No, I am just pointing out that numbers alone tell only a relatively small part of the story. (As other posters no doubt support).

Like Kimchi said, it all depends on what you are willing to do, and how well prepared you are to do it.

And just because you have overwhelming numbers on your side doesn't mean that you will score a smashing victory either, as the persians found out at Marathon.

True. And the Athenians were the wimpy geeks. And they'd just charged from (was it a mile) off. In full battle armor. My sister and I have contemplated a cartoon about this.

(Huge persian army stands in battlefield. Cloud of dust in the distance.)

Next Panel: Cloud of dust slightly larger. Caption reads, five minutes later.

Next Panel: Cloud of dust larger. Caption reads, ten minutes later

Next Panel: Cloud of dust rather large. Caption reads thirty minutes later

Next Panel: Cloud of dust even larger. Caption reads, forty minutes later.

Final Panel: Cloud of dust very large. Persian commander says, 'Right men, they're almost here. Get ready.'

True. And the Athenians were the wimpy geeks. And they'd just charged from (was it a mile) off. In full battle armor. My sister and I have contemplated a cartoon about this.

(Huge persian army stands in battlefield. Cloud of dust in the distance.)

Next Panel: Cloud of dust slightly larger. Caption reads, five minutes later.

Next Panel: Cloud of dust larger. Caption reads, ten minutes later

Next Panel: Cloud of dust rather large. Caption reads thirty minutes later

Next Panel: Cloud of dust even larger. Caption reads, forty minutes later.

Final Panel: Cloud of dust very large. Persian commander says, 'Right men, they're almost here. Get ready.'


Unless the Athenians were superhuman, i doubt that they could charge in full battle armor for 40 minutes, im might be wrong here, as i dont know much about athens

Unless the Athenians were superhuman, i doubt that they could charge in full battle armor for 40 minutes, im might be wrong here, as i dont know much about athens

I'm just graping here for times. I'd put some research into it if I ever actually did the drawing. But first I have to learn how to draw.:(

Unless the Athenians were superhuman, i doubt that they could charge in full battle armor for 40 minutes, im might be wrong here, as i dont know much about athens

In order to mimize the effect of the persian archers on the hoplites, the greek phalanxes double timed it across the bay and charged the last 200 yds into the numerically superior persian forces.

The wings of the greek line then enfolded the perisians in a double envelopment, and they killed them all.

It was pretty superhuman, considering they did all that in 70-80lbs of kit.

I don't think it actually took 40 mins. I imagine that is a joke about the greeks being wimpy.

America imports 10% of China's goods. We stop buying Chinese, they take a massive economic hit. Indeed, war is very bad for buisness.

China, by the way, is very overrated in their power. Manpower alone does not delegate military strength.

ok this has puzzled me, how are america and china not at war!? with china pratically keeping americas economy goin 4 years america turns around and says devalue your currency basically to reduce their debt. china want taiwan back and said that they could use force and america will defend taiwan if it is invaded! the only reason i can think that it hasnt happend yet is because america realises how large the chinese army is and now the fact tht china have signed a treaty with russia and the 4 "Stan's"The size of China's army is not the key..

The Key is the Chinese Nukes + The Chinese willingness to suffer unlimited amounts of casualties.

War IS bad for business. However... it's never stopped people before.

War is good for SOME businesses...

As for the outcome of war between the two parties, the US doesn't have to actually Invade China in a conventional war, it has to defend the interests of regional allies. The ball would be in China's court to move forces into regions which America would be defending. Right now, they don't really have the resources comparable to the US. Therefore, the US wouldn't be encountering the same kind of problems that it's facing in Iraq.

As for the nuclear option... don't think either powers' gonna go there...

China, by the way, is very overrated in their power. Manpower alone does not delegate military strength.
read this (http://www.sinodefence.com/) link and rethink about the Chinese power being overated

I would just like to remark with the whole US is not even winning the war in Iraq thing....hmmmm....u dumbassess the insurgents, keyword insurgents, are using guerilla style warfare....for u British out there u know this the most because of the Boer War and many others. For Russia it was the same thing except they didnt have some of the population help fight against the guerilla's. THE IRAQI ARMY OF SADDAM WAS DESTROYED... THE GUERILLA FIGHTERS WHO FLY UNDER NO NATIONS BANNER ARE THE ONES WE ARE FIGHTING I LIKE TO SEE CANADA AND OTHER NATIONS OF EUROPE DEAL WITH GUERILLA FIGHTERS WHO WEAR CIVILIAN CLOTHING AND BE ALL LIKE WE THE SHITTT!!! CAUSE ITS A BITCH TO KILL WAT U CANT SEE BUT WE BEEN DOING A MIGHTY FINE JOB IF THE WORLD SAW HOW WE KILLED BIN LADENS SECOND IN COMMAND AND HE THEN SENT A TRUCE TO THE U.S. TO GET US OFF HIS BACK

Why would China want to attack the US? They are getting billions of dollars in foreign investment, are selling billions to us in manufactured goods, and are taking on a huge share of our debt. Them declaring war on us would be the greatest economic and political mistake they could ever make; they have too much to gain from continued economic cooperation with the US.

BTW, China hasn't kept our economy going. US consumer spending, business capital spending, and government expenditures have. China provides us with cheap products, although some of that is due to the undervaluation of the yuan. However, it is in ours as well as China's best interests to allow them to devalue the yuan at a scale they feel is best, simply to avoid the risk of economic damage.

read this (http://www.sinodefence.com/) link and rethink about the Chinese power being overated

The only problem is that their economy is incapable of supporting those weapons in the field. The war is won first economically and then by the weapons in the field.

I LIKE TO SEE CANADA AND OTHER NATIONS OF EUROPE

Well, there's quite a bit in your post I would like to deal with, but I'll stick with this for now.

This is North America (http://www.mapsales.com/northamericamap/universal%20north%20america%20wall%20maps.gif)

This is Europe (http://www.edinphoto.org.uk/0_MAPS/0_map_europe_political_2001_enlarged.jpg)

Please note which Canada is in. Thank you. Good night.

Well, there's quite a bit in your post I would like to deal with, but I'll stick with this for now.

This is North America (http://www.geonames.de/native_north_america.jpg)

This is Europe (http://www.edinphoto.org.uk/0_MAPS/0_map_europe_political_2001_enlarged.jpg)

Please note which Canada is in. Thank you. Good night.

The confusion is easy though. A canadian once told me that canada was "really european."

This is North America (http://www.geonames.de/native_north_america.jpg)

Why is North America melting?

Why is North America melting?

Global Warming.:p

The confusion is easy though. A canadian once told me that canada was "really european."

Canada's a pretty big country. Kinda difficult to misplace. Especially if it borders your country to the north, and those wily Canadian's are always infiltrating our country. (Canadian Bacon, anybody)*

Assuming, from his post, that Dragon Territories is indeed American.


*Anybody who gets this reference gets a free cyber-cookie.

The confusion is easy though. A canadian once told me that canada was "really european."
Well, when compared to other American countries, like Mexico, Honduras, or Brazil, you can see it's has more of an European flavour, like Argentina.

Why is North America melting?

Point conceded, it's not the best drawn map. Give me a second.

There. Edited.

Well, when compared to other American countries, like Mexico, Honduras, or Brazil, you can see it's has more of an European flavour, like Argentina.

You've never been to argentina have you?

Canada's a pretty big country. Kinda difficult to misplace. Especially if it borders your country to the north, and those wily Canadian's are always infiltrating our country. (Canadian Bacon, anybody)*

Assuming, from his post, that Dragon Territories is indeed American.


*Anybody who gets this reference gets a free cyber-cookie.

Oh, I know where it is, I am just pointing out that apparently as there are some canadians that are confused about it you shouldn't get down on people for that kind of mistake.

You've never been to argentina have you?
At least Buenos Aires is pretty European. The rest, you're right, from the Pampas to Tucumán is all-America.

At least Buenos Aires is pretty European. The rest, you're right, from the Pampas to Tucumán is all-America.

I've only actually spent a few weeks in BA, most of the time I spent was in mesopotamia/urguay. The most european place I went to down there is Montevideo. Moreso than BA, I thought.

That said, it is about as european as canada. There are some strong european elements, but it's unique and not really similar at all.

I quite liked it. It's a pity about all the troubles. (I was there in the mid-nineties).

Oh, I know where it is, I am just pointing out that apparently as there are some canadians that are confused about it you shouldn't get down on people for that kind of mistake.

Oh, I know you know, don't worry.

I'm sure that the majority of Canadians, if you asked, would know which continent (sp??) their country is located on.

Most of 'em would probably know which one the U.S. is located on as well. A few might not be aware the U.S. exists, but I wouldn't count on it.

I've only actually spent a few weeks in BA, most of the time I spent was in mesopotamia/urguay. The most european place I went to down there is Montevideo. Moreso than BA, I thought.

That said, it is about as european as canada. There are some strong european elements, but it's unique and not really similar at all.

I quite liked it. It's a pity about all the troubles. (I was there in the mid-nineties).
Of course, how could I have forgotten Montevideo! Yeah, it's just a bit of European flavour, not saying they're like Paris or that most European of cities in Europe: Dnipropetrovs'k :)

This kinda annoys me the most. Why would anyone bring up this topic, especially when China and US economic ties are so good? I'm Chinese American, so no.. I dont want China and America at war.

US vs. China: Who will win?

Obviously, US has the power to win, because of their nuclear weapons and technology, but don't forget that China has some counter forces too. China has a 3.5 million man army, about 2.5 million more than US. They have nuclear weapons, like USA, but not as many. Their most prime diplomatic partner, Russia, second country with the most nuclear weapons and one of the super power countries.

US, Russia, and China are the top 3 countries in Superpower Status. If America attack one of the superpowers, China or Russia, they are done for. Russia would be involve and the end of the world?

Who knows...

One word (ok acronym):
MAD
Simple, easy. That right there is why China and the USA will not go to war anytime soon. Even if they had no economic ties, that stills binds them to a state of peace. Because as long as the people in both governments don't have a serious mental retardation, they understand that no one wins a war that goes nuclear.

uhhh because novody wants a nuclear war? If we had no nukes we would have probably had a few battles by now. The all or nothing factor of nuclear weopons.

When Chinese forces entered the Korean peninsula in 1950, the CCP had been in power in China for barely a year. China had endured almost 40 years of civil war and Japanese invasion. The Communist forces had captured American tanks and planes after the Nationalist forces fled to Taiwan, but none of them were used in the Korean conflict for fear that Chiang Kai-Shek would attempt to regain control of the mainland. Indeed, the forces sent to attack UN forces had no tanks or artillery. They were severly underequipped, without enough rifles to go around. The largest caliber weapons they had were ~80mm mortars. No anti-tank weapons.

Chinese troops were also outnumbered.
United Nations force strength: ~1,000,000
Chinese force strength: ~700,000

Despite this, China was able to repulse UN forces all the way back to the 38th parallel and hold the line for two years, until a truce was agreed on.


United Nations casualties: Western figures:1,000,000 Chinese figures:1,000,000
Chinese casualties: Western figures:600,000 - 900,000 Chinese figures: 390,000

The Western figures for Chinese casualties are clearly overinflated, for it would mean every Chinese soldier became a casualty. Numbers like 900,000 dead and wounded are even more proposterous because, as noted above, Chinese forces only totaled 700,000...


Historian and Korean War veteran Bevin Alexander had this to say about Chinese tactics in his book How Wars Are Won:

The Chinese had no air power and were armed only with rifles, machineguns, hand grenades, and mortars. Against the much more heavily armed Americans, they adapted a technique they had used against the Nationalists in the Chinese civil war of 1946–49. The Chinese generally attacked at night and tried to close in on a small troop position-generally a platoon- and then attacked it with local superiority in numbers. The usual method was to infiltrate small units, from a platoon of fifty men to a company of 200, split into separate detachments. While one team cut off the escape route of the Americans, the others struck both the front and the flanks in concerted assaults. The attacks continued on all sides until the defenders were destroyed or forced to withdraw. The Chinese then crept forward to the open flank of the next platoon position, and repeated the tactics.




It would not be wise to underestimate China's ability to defend itself.

Will China and the US ever go to war? Not likely.

However, if say they do (which I highly doubt), there are two factors to consider on either side. Say:

US Wins and defeats China,
Then they will have a much harder time controlling a nation of around 1.5 billion people sucked in by over fifty years worth of nationalism. Also note the fact that should America go nuclear, there would be massive thought provocation from even the UN against America. Henceforth we are considering that America (nor China) went nuclear, and therefore, America won in conventional conflict. Sure, a defeat is certainly plausible, but for America to have a hold in China is a completely different and impossible task. China is a much more powerful and different beast than Iraq.

US Wins and leaves China,
What a wreck, economic depression. Some might say 'oh, we can build more in other countries around them', but factor that there are plans to relocate, to rebuild, to find new suitable spots, to find countries with laws that are as lenient, are as different, with similiar policies. Yes, it might be an alternative, but a costly one, and it wouldn't certainly help America. Make no mistake, it would hurt the economy dearly if China was just left there.

China defeats US,
Large UN retaliation. Russia won't back them up.

**NOTE: I am chinese, but don't think I'm being biased towards one side.

War is usually bad for business, and business between China and the US is good.

Money and corporations is far, far more important than countries and religions.
Bad for business? *cites World War II and Stock Market Crash of 1929*

Bad for business? *cites World War II and Stock Market Crash of 1929*

It was because of the first World War that sundered Germany in the second, bringing it out. How ironic.

IMO:

Whoever invades would lose.

If the US tried to land troops in China, it would be a miserable failure. They'd be outnumbered by a lot, and that would make a difference; they'd be fighting on foreign soil, probably would come up against guerilla-like resistance, and would in general be outclassed.

If China tried to get troops to the US, they'd never get here - the US navy and air force would prevent any landing from ever taking place.

If it went to a nuclear war, both would lose - there are no winners in a nuclear holocaust.

It would really stink if the U.S. went to war with China. Too many people in the US are of Chinese decent. I'd hate to see how people would deal with the conflict between country and culture.