Jump to content

What is China thinking, and to what end?


Recommended Posts

quit_yume

Since you're not here for serious discussion I will not engage with you and I urge all other members to do the same until serious discussion ensues.

 

agreed.. no need to feed the trolls...

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Majorsco

    10

  • Mr. Mike

    8

  • Brucewayne

    5

  • rainymike

    5

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

agreed.. no need to feed the trolls...

it depends on whether the poster is serious or just trying to provoke. There is no point in arguing (or discussing) with a flamer.

More like the dumb ass Chinese sailors can't control their boats so the US had to maneuver to avoid sinking the Chinese garbage barge they call their Navy.   See, I can spout sill crap just as well

Jack_be_nimble

agreed.. no need to feed the trolls...

 

But, this troll is so intertaining. Can't resist. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brucewayne

It seems to me that wealth is the main reason to go to war these days.

If one country thinks they can come out ahead by going to war, they probably will, but by the same token, if the country has more to lose than they might gain by going to war, they probably won't go to war.

China is in need of wealth at the moment and wants any oil that may be under the islands they are haggling over.

The problem seems to be that the U.S., Japan and other powers might set up sanctions which would stop the majority of China's exports to their largest buyers.

It is a balancing act and if China thinks about what is in their best interest, they will finally back down.

If not, there is a slight possibility a large war may break out that could nearly bankrupt the largest financial leaders of the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Majorsco

It seems to me that wealth is the main reason to go to war these days.

If one country thinks they can come out ahead by going to war, they probably will, but by the same token, if the country has more to lose than they might gain by going to war, they probably won't go to war.

China is in need of wealth at the moment and wants any oil that may be under the islands they are haggling over.

The problem seems to be that the U.S., Japan and other powers might set up sanctions which would stop the majority of China's exports to their largest buyers.

It is a balancing act and if China thinks about what is in their best interest, they will finally back down.

If not, there is a slight possibility a large war may break out that could nearly bankrupt the largest financial leaders of the world.

Yes, most wars in history have wealth at their core. If China goes too far the world, who are China's customers in the global marketplace will find it unpalatable to buy those cheap poisonous goods they're used to and isolate China evonomivally. South America could produce higher quality goods with less lethality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say, most, not all wars appear to have wealth as the driving factor. It appeared to be genuine humanitarian reasons for the intervention in Yugoslavia/Kosovo.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
mactanfamily

It seems that this was more a case of the Chinese not following COLREGS (collision regulations). The US is claiming the Chinese tank landing ship cut in front of it by only 180 meters. If the Chinese came from the Cowpens left side as I would guess from their statement that the Chinese need to follow the collision regulations, it had no right to do so, whether there was a carrier near by or not.

 

If these idiots can't even follow maritime rules of the road we are in for a disaster.

 

A damn tank landing ship? What a joke. The Cowpens cold have cut that piece of junk in 2 and kept going.

F2012062513134100993.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

China and the US will not be going to war anytime soon. They rely too much on each other's economies. China will test the waters to see what they can get away with in the South China Sea as they need the resources there.

 

There is really no country in the region (except maybe Japan.....while being backed by the US) could possibly oppose them. They will continue to bully as much as they can in the region, but won't extend out further than that. They are just showing their regional power.

 

Let's not act like the US stands alone in the world. Most (if not all) of the Western military powers back the US. I'd estimate that 75 percent of world military spending sides with the US. The military power houses of the West would crush China, Russia and what few countries with a respectable military that supports them.

 

If such a thing did happen it would be very likely the end of that war would be nuclear weapons......and nobody wins with that.

Edited by Wrye83
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There is really no country in the region (except maybe Japan.....while being backed by the US) could possibly oppose them

 

It is my understanding that japan rotates its naval fleet on a 10 year basis-- while they decommission the ships they do not destroy them--- they keep them turn key and ready to re-commission them on short notice

 

they could effectively double the size of their navy at the drop of a hat

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told my China contacts if i shoot at them not to take it personally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rainymike

 

 

Since you're not here for serious discussion I will not engage with you and I urge all other members to do the same until serious discussion ensues.

 

Sadly, too much of America's foreign policy is based on this kind of thinking. I think all points of view - good or bad, right or left have value in this discussion. Otherwise, it's not a discussion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, too much of America's foreign policy is based on this kind of thinking. I think all points of view - good or bad, right or left have value in this discussion. Otherwise, it's not a discussion.

 

it depends on whether the poster is serious or just trying to provoke. There is no point in arguing (or discussing) with a flamer.
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
rainymike

 

 

it depends on whether the poster is serious or just trying to provoke. There is no point in arguing (or discussing) with a flamer.

 

I don't disagree, but I don't need anyone else deciding that for me. I can draw my own conclusions and add any comments that I feel are relevant. I'm a big boy now. 

 

Despite that, I do feel this is a useful thread. China will shape this region immensely and the Phils during my lifetime and the lifetime of my kids. I want them to be prepared for that. But I want my kids to be able to hear all points of view and be able to decide for themselves. There's already too many agents out there trying to filter reality for me. I don't need CNN, FoxNews, Wikipedia, Mad magazine, some troll, or some anti-troll to do that for me. 

 

LOL ... I'm retired and have a lot more time on my hands now. I enjoy reading divergent points of view. Makes me think. Had too long a career following the party line and I don't need that anymore.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
MIDNITERIDER

Ever heard the term "duty trawler"?

I have a fairly good idea that's it's Navy or USCG jargon for a vessel unfortunate enough to be selected as that day's "training aid" but I thought you'd tell us anyway, lol. But I wouldn't get my Irish up for anything very tumultuous on the high seas in the Pacific any time soon once they get these "cold war kinks" protocol worked out for our little hijinks we were so expert with and much more dangerously keeping up underseas between our old Soviet and our submarines. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Emdzsz_XvfA

 

"While the PLAN rarely reveals insights about its operations and tactics, its “near-seas active defense” strategy offers some hints of how China would engage in sea combat. The term “active defense” traces its origins to Mao Zedong’s famous military essays on guerilla warfare in the 1930s. Mao scorned the idea of passive defense, insisting instead that “the only real defense is active defense.” By this he meant “defense for the purpose of counter-attacking and taking the offensive.” For Mao, even defensive aims were best attained by offensive means."
 
(...)"the PLAN is still largely a sea-denial force, unable to project and sustain naval power over great distances. While the proportion of modern equipment is growing, obsolescent platforms constitute a drag on the navy. The PLAN is still playing catch up with the U.S. Navy, and Chinese armed forces have not fought a major war since 1979. The PLAN is thus in no position to slug it out with the U.S. fleet on the open ocean. It will take many more years for China to build a genuine blue-water navy—if that is indeed the goal—to engage in a one-on-one struggle with American naval forces."
 
"But the outcome of the Pacific War does not by itself condemn China’s anti-access strategy to failure. After all, major battles that turned the tide of the Pacific War, including Midway and Guadalcanal, were all close-run things. Had chance favored Japan in any one of those encounters, the price of American victory might have soared. With all the advantages that the U.S. Navy enjoyed, it still took 30 months of arduous fighting to tear down Japan’s anti-access wall."
 
 
PS. "Naval trawlers were produced mostly during the course of WW2 as number of small shipyards specialised in this type of ship and their resources were idealy suited to the Admiralty. The order was given for the construction of new trawlers based on the commercial designs which could be readily modified into escorts and minesweepers."
 
"Minesweeping of course comes almost naturally to the fishermen who man the trawlers. The task of handling and towing the minesweepers is almost the same thing as their ordinary occupation of handling the trawl." 
 
Edited by MIDNITERIDER
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
thebob

Carriers are just so last century. They are just big expensive targets in the modern world.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

Capture.JPG

I Understand...