NationStates Jolt Archive

What's your take on this recent "US vs. China" stuff happening on the forums lately? Who is truly stronger (militarily)? Please though, no flaming in this thread.

Personally, I think the US would beat China in most warfare, but it would be a very hard war if invasion of China comes into play, with their mountians, tons of people, etc. We have way better weapons, but they're slowly catching up. Also, in a war, trade would be stopped. BIG advantage for China. But then again, we're the main person they export to. So in general, the US is stronger (IMO). What do you think?

What's your take on this recent "US vs. China" stuff happening on the forums lately? Who is truly stronger (militarily)? Please though, no flaming in this thread.

Personally, I think the US would beat China in most warfare, but it would be a very hard war if invasion of China comes into play, with their mountians, tons of people, etc. We have way better weapons, but they're slowly catching up. Also, in a war, trade would be stopped. BIG advantage for China. But then again, we're the main person they export to. So in general, the US is stronger (IMO). What do you think?

Well ... considering the amount of US government debt the Chinese hold, all they'd have to do is foreclose on us in the case of a conflict. Oh, we could probably incinerate most of them, but to what end? And invading the place would be a catastrophe.

Hmmmm, id say we'd all be dead within 10 minutes of the initiaztion of the China- US war.

Hmmmm, id say we'd all be dead within 10 minutes of the initiaztion of the China- US war.

Why would you say that? I don't think they can reach us quite yet.

Well ... considering the amount of US government debt the Chinese hold, all they'd have to do is foreclose on us in the case of a conflict. Oh, we could probably incinerate most of them, but to what end? And invading the place would be a catastrophe.

They don't have many nukes though. If we want'd too, we could glass 'em. Also, the stuff from there we get is little plastic things, like shoes, and toys. Another giant contributor to our economy, Japan, our ally, might give a fairly comparible amount of trade to us.

I don't think China wants to take on the US directly. They don't have to.

A month or so ago they called for a conference with African leaders. Almost every single one came.

They already have huge influence in the 3rd world (being a formerly 3rd world country that "made it"), they have a strong manufacturing base and hold heaps of foreign debt.

They can probably just keep going as they are right now for another few decades and they'll replace the US without ever having to do anything really controversial.

As long as they can manage the social pressures of modernisation, that is.

They don't have many nukes though. If we want'd too, we could glass 'em. Also, the stuff from there we get is little plastic things, like shoes, and toys. Another giant contributor to our economy, Japan, our ally, might give a fairly comparible amount of trade to us.

Not if we nuke China. The fallout alone would take out the Japanese (winds blow from China toward Japan). People tend to get annoyed by that, go figure. All of which goes to show, war's not really a solution, is it? Especially not if people starting throwing the big toys around.

Economy though- I know about three acountants, and many online stuff that say China is headed for an implosion of their economy. It's growing to fast- soon it's bubble will pop.

Economy though- I know about three acountants, and many online stuff that say China is headed for an implosion of their economy. It's growing to fast- soon it's bubble will pop.
They've been saying that for two decades now. I study economics at uni, and as far as I can tell the Chinese government has done quite well in containing all sorts of pressures (even though they can't seem to get growth down a bit, no matter how hard they try :p ).

The only thing that could be a worry is their banking system, and considering that one of their biggest banks recently went public (with huge success) tells me that they're working on it.

Most studies by the United Nations economic organizations, as well as economists from individual nations, have said that they do not believe China's economic growth is sustainable at its current rate. Some say that China will simply slow down in economic growth and basically level out for the foreseeable future, but some suggest that the communist-style government in Beijing may try to force economic growth after it has become advisable and by doing so cause some sort of economic crisis that would trigger a repression or depression.

Also, at least in terms of economics, all the United States and China can really do to each other are commit mutual economic suicide. Yes, China could call in all the debt they have acquired or even release the US currency they have purchased. But by doing so they would blast the economy of the only other nation in the international community that has had the ability to sustain the consumer drive to eat what they produce. If the United States economy tanks and our buying power decreases then China has a lot of exports that are just going to set in their ports, warehouses, and factories and be a huge drain on their economy. You also have to figure that a lot of United States allies would probably not pick up the slack for China because of at least tacit support of the US war effort. So it would be safe to say that Japan, the United Kingdom (not a large market but still one), other portions of Europe, South Korea-maybe, Australia, definitely Taiwan, and some others will enact embargoes or at least trade less with China and deal them another economic blow. From the economic perspective the whole affair is mutually assured destruction in the economic theater.

In terms of military the Chinese have a large army, but do not have a practical means of deploying it outside of China. If they are facing the United States Navy with allied support (Japan, Taiwan, and maybe some others), I don't see China being able to do much besides sitting in their own territory and shaking their fist at their enemies. Last time I checked I think the Chinese navy only had a single Soviet or Russian built carrier to its name and was decidedly more of a brown water navy than a blue water navy. Their airforce is also not entirely comparable to most NATO-backed air forces and numbers won't when a battle in the air over quality, the Battle of Britain proved that much.

I also don't know what cause would incite the Chinese to engage the US in a war or the US engaging China. Unless China just makes a pass at Taiwan, which would be unadvisable, or the US just decided "those Chinese sum-ofa-bitches are going down!" (to quote one Flash movie) there's not really a flashpoint to trigger a major conflict.

They already have huge influence in the 3rd world (being a formerly 3rd world country that "made it"), they have a strong manufacturing base and hold heaps of foreign debt.Minor nitpicking... China is a 2nd World country and has been since shortly after the USSR appeared. The "World" terms come from the Cold War era; 1st World were the major capitalist countries (sometimes refered to as "industrialized democracies"), 2nd World were major communist/socialist countries, and 3rd World were everyone else.

They can probably just keep going as they are right now for another few decades and they'll replace the US without ever having to do anything really controversial.I completely agree. China, should they finish the slide to capitalism, will most likely replace the US as the largest economic superpower in the world within a few decades. The former Soviet Union also is a region to keep an eye on. Both have massive infrastructures, unified languages, and tremendous natural resources. In my opnion, China's chances are better because it's not fragmented like the Soviets have become.

Well ... considering the amount of US government debt the Chinese hold, all they'd have to do is foreclose on us in the case of a conflict. Oh, we could probably incinerate most of them, but to what end? And invading the place would be a catastrophe.Umm... in case of war I doubt the US government would honour that debt...

As much as I would love to burst Americas penis waving in the event of war the U.S would likely suffer far less (with that being the only real indicator of a win). A land or naval war would be a slaughter so its likely that the U.S would resort to bombing China and keep bombing until the bombs run out (I don’t think China would surrender really). In short would be a problem: China will not surrender + the U.S will not stop = decades of small skirmishes as soon as the U.S runs out of bombs.

With that said if the U.S somehow got North Korea on side a push on Beijing might be possible which I guess would be some sort of victory if a member of Government found themselves into American hands and there was someone to surrender (but fighting in the eastern provinces will likely go on for years still)

Umm... in case of war I doubt the US government would honour that debt...
Which immediately means that no one else will be interested in US bonds anymore - complete annihilation of the US financial system would follow.

Umm... in case of war I doubt the US government would honour that debt...

depends on how fast China moves really if it sees war coming or the U.S doesn’t act quick enough its in deep shit

As much as I would love to burst Americas penis waving in the event of war the U.S would likely suffer far less (with that being the only real indicator of a win). A land or naval war would be a slaughter so its likely that the U.S would resort to bombing China and keep bombing until the bombs run out (I don’t think China would surrender really). In short would be a problem: China will not surrender + the U.S will not stop = decades of small skirmishes as soon as the U.S runs out of bombs.

With that said if the U.S somehow got North Korea on side a push on Beijing might be possible which I guess would be some sort of victory if a member of Government found themselves into American hands and there was someone to surrender (but fighting in the eastern provinces will likely go on for years still)

If we bombed China for decades, I really think it would be a giant crater by the end of the first few tears, and the other bombs would be a waste. If we were going to bomb them, I say we should nuke 'em good (say about 10,000 or so) so they can't respond. Sanctions would be the same if we conventionally bombed them, as the U.N. just is a pointless organization, only standing in the way.

Which immediately means that no one else will be interested in US bonds anymore - complete annihilation of the US financial system would follow.Not at all. No one would expect a country to give money to a country it is at war with. Therefore anyone belonging to a country strongly allied to the US would still have confidence in US bonds.

depends on how fast China moves really if it sees war coming or the U.S doesn’t act quick enough its in deep shitI'm not sure what you mean. The US will most likely never be debt free again. And well... China would not want to obliterate its currency reserve and lose the money owed to it in bonds.

Which immediately means that no one else will be interested in US bonds anymore - complete annihilation of the US financial system would follow.

Yes, but they can't 'foreclose' with it either. Treasuries don't work that way. The most they can do is sell it in the secondary market. The dollar would slide against other currencies most likely, and long term interest rates would go up, but that's about it.

No forclosure or anything.

What's your take on this recent "US vs. China" stuff happening on the forums lately? Who is truly stronger (militarily)? Please though, no flaming in this thread.

Personally, I think the US would beat China in most warfare, but it would be a very hard war if invasion of China comes into play, with their mountians, tons of people, etc. We have way better weapons, but they're slowly catching up. Also, in a war, trade would be stopped. BIG advantage for China. But then again, we're the main person they export to. So in general, the US is stronger (IMO). What do you think?

China would beat the US hands down in any engagement anywhere in Asia. China is the Regional superpower and we could'nt beat them over any conflict in any country in Asia. Any other disputed continent on that side of the world would be to close to call by me, and China couldn't beat the US anywhere in North America, most likley South America too. Judging this be a global war over resources. If US invades China US loses big time. If China tries to cross the Pacific, the Chinese are fishbait.

A US war with another country such as Iraq is highly unlikely, let alone with a major power such as China. I would fully expect the rest of the world to either remain neutral or oppose the aggressor in such a scenario due and attempt to keep some sembalance of stability going so that their economies do not collapse. Any war with two major economic powers is likely to trigger worldwide economic collapse and hence is not an option unless worldwide economies are already collapsing.

The only possible beneficiaries of such a war would likely be Europe and possibly Central Asia.

Europe is currently a net exporter of food crops. This means in the case of economic collapse it is more likely to be able to sustain itself as it able to continue to feed itself and engage in Keynesian economics to maintain full employment (not needing to worry overly about inflation and reintroduce rationing). It should also be able to export its surpluses to countries of economic importance such as Russia and central asia whom will be Europe's fossil fuel suppliers. Europe might also be able to increase its arms industry and export munitions and arms to either China or the US after any intial nuclear barrage.

And so on and so on.

If we bombed China for decades, I really think it would be a giant crater by the end of the first few tears, and the other bombs would be a waste. If we were going to bomb them, I say we should nuke 'em good (say about 10,000 or so) so they can't respond. Sanctions would be the same if we conventionally bombed them, as the U.N. just is a pointless organization, only standing in the way.

just like Vietnam? and pointlessly throwing around nukes will not solve anything other than uniting the world against you which you can’t win

And interesting you mentioned the U.N the very thing you will be against should you choose to pointlessly throw nukes around

I'm not sure what you mean. The US will most likely never be debt free again. And well... China would not want to obliterate its currency reserve and lose the money owed to it in bonds.

if China asks for there money at anytime before war breaks out the U.S actually has to pay them

Meh, right now, China would lose every engagement at sea or in the air but could not be successfully invaded.

Their navy is designed for brownwater work, they may get carriers going at some stage but not for a while. Their aircraft are coming on in leaps and bounds (not least due to a hghly profitable arrangement with the Israeli defence industry) and their ground forces are formidable.

In 20 years or so they will be a match for the US in their part of the world and from their point of view, that's all they'll need. In the meantime they'll get on with not antagonising the US too much and building their own relationships with other asian and African countries especially.

if China asks for there money at anytime before war breaks out the U.S actually has to pay themAh, I had presumed that the US would be the one to precipitate the war and hence have prior knowledge of their own intentions and not be willing to repay the debt, even if asked to.

Infact the US could call any massive request for repayment as an act or war as it would likely damage the US economy severely. Hence they wouldn't pay and would attack Chinese interests instead.

Treasuries don't work that way.
I know how treasuries work, and if no one will buy their bonds, they can't do anything at all. Particularly since the US Government and the institution which print money aren't one and the same thing, and their exchanges work through bonds sold to the public.

It's a long story, but suffice to say that if no one will buy the bonds, the US government won't be able to do anything.

Hmmmm, id say we'd all be dead within 10 minutes of the initiaztion of the China- US war.

The PRC is ill equipped to wage an intercontinental nuclear war with anybody, espescially someone with effective first strike weapons systems.

Which immediately means that no one else will be interested in US bonds anymore - complete annihilation of the US financial system would follow.

I have a hard time buying the case that China has the US over a barrel. What the US typically does when dealing with a adversary is freeze the assets of said adversary. With the Chinese Bonds frozen and then can be used to repay damages the Chinese did to US interests and that of allies. I just don't see the US dollar collapsing because of a war with China. In fact it would most likely become stronger due to the fact the spectre of massive bond dumping would be put to rest.

I know how treasuries work, and if no one will buy their bonds, they can't do anything at all. Particularly since the US Government and the institution which print money aren't one and the same thing, and their exchanges work through bonds sold to the public.

It's a long story, but suffice to say that if no one will buy the bonds, the US government won't be able to do anything.

There would be a massive bond drive as they did in WWII. The American public would buy bonds to relieve the situation. It has happened before so it would most likely happen.

Utter stalemate. U.S sinks the Chinese's pathetic navy and crushes there airforce, and china repels any landing attempts made. Then after years of a grinding war of attrition we will pull out.

Do you know that America is in deficit and is way in debt and is begging China to devalue its Yuan so its economy will rise

Do you know that America is in deficit and is way in debt and is begging China to devalue its Yuan so its economy will rise

US Assets still outweigh US debts. So technically the US deficit can be overcome by it's assets. US cash position alone is 2.3 trillion when I checked on this very fact last week. The land/mineral assets alone far outstrip the national deficit and make it look like pocket change. The deficit is really much to do about nothing. It is a tool in the governments arsenal to control it's economic policies and positions.

The reason the US wants the Yuan to float free and not tie directly to the US dollar is because of fair trade. Our trade deficit with China is way out of control and needs to be brought under control to help promote a healthier economy.

Well ... considering the amount of US government debt the Chinese hold, all they'd have to do is foreclose on us in the case of a conflict.

Have you heard of this saying,

If you lend a little to a man, it is his worry.

If you lend a lot to a man, it is YOUR worry.;)

I know how treasuries work, and if no one will buy their bonds, they can't do anything at all. Particularly since the US Government and the institution which print money aren't one and the same thing, and their exchanges work through bonds sold to the public.

It's a long story, but suffice to say that if no one will buy the bonds, the US government won't be able to do anything.

My point was rather that china can't show up to the US government tommorrow and demand money for all the bonds it currently holds. Not that the US gov. was going to default on its debt.

And given that the US bond market alone is worth 40 trillion dollars more or less, I can't really see the problem in getting rid of 300 billion worth of treasuries. Hell japan has nearly three times as much.

*Looks at thread title words: "big bluff"*

http://macrochan.org/source/O/L/OL2FMW5572564QITMTTTVVA5KTIH6HBI.jpeg