China declares war on the US
- Thread starter Broken Bones89
- Start date
Bodin
GMBC
What's interesting is that you indirectly suggest that there's a possibility that Australia wouldn't ally with the US. You, sir, are clearly smoking crack.
Spanky_Ham
Porcinus Slappius
Im hoping australia could fight with f*cking Queensland... and probably them Melbourne bogans that sh*t the sh*t out of sh*tty spanky... then... then, we'll start australia v New Zealand... they've got no army/airforce/navy... sh*t easy....
Go Best Korea.... GO!!!
Tomas
my mum says im cool
Why? It's just not true that China relies heavily on it's exports. It's INCORRECT. Yes, China supplies a proportion of the worlds goods. It also has a bulging middle class that consumes, travels and spends liberally.And your comment was so amazingly useless it is funny... But then again just saying
(not claiming mine to be any more useful)
Neon
Likes Dirt
well yeah it would be stupid not to side with the US, but it would also be stupid to not side with the new super-power which is china.
the question is wether or not China is powerfull enough already for Australia to side with them and not effected greatly by the US
wombat
Lives in a hole
I imagine the 'uselessness' refers to the fact that your post didn't actually contribute anything to the discussion. Sure, the post you quoted may have been incorrect, but your response seemed as though it was intended to do nothing other than assert your superior knowledge on the subject, as opposed to trying to educate someone who is less aware.
It's all well and good to highlight ignorance, but it'd be even more constructive to try and help resolve that ignorance (more like what you posted second time).
PINT of Stella. mate!
Many, many Scotches
Well, Sarah Palin has already aligned the US with North Korea so I guess we'll join them and China and gang up on South Korea
AchilleusGoyo
Banned
The truth is China declares war on the Japan!
China is not an ASEAN member, it is part of ASEAN+3 and any treaties that is signs with ASEAN states is only as useful as any member wants it to be at any time. Case in point are the comments made by ASEAN members regarding Ang San Suu Kyi and the election in Myanmar. Basically, ASEAN charter has zero to do with China and its sovereignty from the get go.
Secondly, the average Wang on the street may consider Tibet part of China but the average Wang doesn't write policy so what they believe is irrelevant and even less so being that the Average Wang cannot change the government if he disagreed with their policies. When dealing with grand strategy you need to be concerned with what the policy makers believe. One of China's strategic imperatives is to protect the heartland (like any other nation), which is the Pearl, the Yangzi and Yellow river systems. This is their fertile land and their population and economic centers.
To protect these one must keep the enemy at greatest distance and deploy your first defences as far out as possible, buffer zones. China has four; Inner Mongolia/Manchuria (which then also utilises Syberia), Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang. All four of these areas have secessionist movements and non-Han ethnicities as their dominant population and culture.
Get a population density map of India and you will see that the bulk of India lives at the foot of the Himalayas. If China didn't hold the Tibetan plateau India would take it (they've had 3 border wars already) That means India would be a few thousand kms closer to the Chinese heartland and on China's side of a natural barrier and defensive position. Mountains are a force multiplier, less forces are required to defend them but it's easy to come down from mountains and move across the low lands (retreating back to the mountains and repeating until you succeed in holding the low land). Planes and valleys are horrible to defend, just ask Poland. So, as it stands now, China has a massive buffer zone, natural barrier and force multiplier...., can't drive a tank across a mountain, as the saying goes. Probably best to keep your opponent on the other side of the barrier, right?
Xinjiang is either mountainous or vast plain/desert (very hard to get forces across and supply them with fuel, water, ammunition, etc. just ask Rommel), Inner Mongolia is a vast plain that experiences severe winters, Taiwan is a forward deployed 'unsinkable aircraft carrier'. Each location difficult for modern armies to traverse, each location rings the heartland. See the strategy here?
China already is an empire, the Han empire that takes in over 50 ethnic minorities that unlike most countries are indigenous to the land that they are living on.
Please take note that I am not saying 'wrong, right, justified, unjustified' or passing any judgement on matters of sovereignty as I am talking strategy, not history or UN laws, just strategic importance. Each country has them, one might site Alaska, Hawaii, Guam if they wanted to qualify that argument.
Sure, a middle class of around 300m, an upper class of say, 50m, leaving an underclass of migrant workers, labourers, farmers and production/construction workers of around 1 billion. China's richest province is the main manufacturing hub that exports the vast majority of its goods. There is no possible way that China's middle class could float this country, especially being that they are really only confined largely to Dalian, Qingdao, Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Chengdu and Chongqing. that's a far eastern belt and one central spec. admin province. The socio-economic geographic spread already challenges development as it is, in an economic downturn there is no way we would see China support itself. I'd like to see any country that could preserve a way of life in a vacuum.
China is not even a regional power, let alone a super power. If it were a regional power the George Washington super carrier would not be sitting off the coast of the North China Plain (there's that idea of plains being vulnerable to invaders again). China would not be having territorial disputes with Japan over the East China Sea, China would not have US survey vessels mapping the sea bed for submarine warfare. China would not be challenging a number of ASEAN states for sovereignty of the South China Seas, China would not allow the US to sell weapons to Taiwan as it would be a province of China (by that I mean paying taxes to and following policy from Beijing, which is clearly is not at the moment).
If China isn't a regional power how could it be a super power?
China doesn't even have one aircraft carrier, the US has 11 carrier strike fleets. The US has been operationally deploying carriers since the second world war and has been engaging in modern battle ship combat since the American Civil War. The furthest China has ever operationally deployed its navy is to the Gulf of Aden for anti-piracy missions and that has only been going on for two years. China retains a minimal second strike capability, but no first strike. The US has a massive second strike capability. The US and Australia are also allies based on the ANZUS treaty.
China needs the US as a market, the US needs China to by debt to fund that market. It's an interdependence however China has the vulnerability as a market is harder to replace than money. QEII is a good example of that.
Neither country wants war, the US is already in two theaters and is much more concerned about Russia than it is Iran than it is DPRK. Once they're out of Iraq and Afghanistan then we will see what happens. But you have a few years before we cross that bridge and there are a few heads that think DPRK will have collapsed by then. If it does China will execute their shelf plan of moving in and 'stabilising' until the UN can take over. In that time the economy will have been opened and the guns largely removed from the DMZ. China would dearly like a prosperous and Beijing friendly state in DPRK than the heatseeker they have there now.
Last edited:
Bodin
GMBC
...and there I was thinking that the DPRK was one of those puppet-led buffer states you were referring to at the beginning of your post. I could have sworn Kim had a seat at the Chinese dinner table... shows how much I know.
Nerf Herder
Wheel size expert
what does this refer to ?
yeah +1 ... reading above, I would have thought this too ... however, I also understand that it would be better not to have a crack pot as a puppet.
My layman's understanding is that KJI does this stuff to both get concessions from the US but more importantly to get more support from China ?? how far off or overly simplistic is my understanding ?
Also, I never thought of the second strike bit or the underclass bit.
Well China is their #1 trading partner so one would think that China has massive leverage over them. However it's almost the other way around; if DPRK collapses the risk is two fold to Beijing. First is that there will be tens of millions of desperate people streaming over the border in to a part of China that already has a lot of poverty and China doesn't want to inherit the failures of Pyang. Secondly it pressures China to move in to DPRK to take control and stabilise things otherwise the peninsula unites under the ROK and that means that the US is essentially on the border of China. Either way out of a collapsed state is expensive and risky for China so when we (the West) say that China should exert more pressure on DPRK Beijing looks at us and says "How?!".
Beijing has already told Pyang to stop with the nuke tests, stop with the hereditary rule and make with the opening of the economy. Since then they have tested another nuclear device, moved to install KJU and made a few pissy little economic zones...., sunken an ROK vessel, tested long range missiles...., oops, SLVs, shelled civilian areas, etc, etc.
What can Beijing do other than try to influence them and stop selling military kit?
Quantitative Easing pt.2, injecting $700bn in to the US econ up till June next year by the Fed. Printing money, basically.
The end goal for KJI is family succession and retaining power of the elite that support him. The way to do that is justify his policy of self reliance and resistance (Juche) and being a world ranking power. How does one do that? Get nuclear weapons so nobody can tell you what to do. That is the end game, everything that you see is a means towards that end. DPRK is a thorn in China's side because it encourages ROK, Japan, US, etc. to increase their military strength (as well as defences such as theater and BMD) and that by relation decreases Chinese military strength resulting in the security dilemma or in other terms and arms race.
China wants Japan and Koreas to bandwagon WITH China, not balance against China. Having DORK carry on like dickheads is not helping Beijing one bit.
Just in regards to the 'seat at the table" bit, yes he does but that is not because he is a favourite son, or anything. It's better to have him on your side than not, for starters and secondly because it makes it 100X harder for Beijing to influence Pyang if there is animosity.
China liked to use DPRK as leverage against the US; "ok, we'll get DORK to simmer down and return to 6-party talks, but you gotta do something for us first.....". But it's gone past that now, the sinking of the Chonnan and this shelling of civilian areas has taken things to a new level and they are starting to cut China out of the loop (China proposed emergency talks in Beijing to deal with the current situation, US, ROK and Japan said 'no thanks, we'll have our own". That means they don't see China's influence as useful as it was 12 months ago and it also cuts Beijing out of jointly forming the response). That's not a very attractive outcome for Beijing.
Pyang asks for a lot from Beijing but it is receiving less and less these days. Still better to keep them onside but they are not the favourite son anymore. I'd suggest they haven't been since the 2009 nuke test.
China liked to use DPRK as leverage against the US; "ok, we'll get DORK to simmer down and return to 6-party talks, but you gotta do something for us first.....". But it's gone past that now, the sinking of the Chonnan and this shelling of civilian areas has taken things to a new level and they are starting to cut China out of the loop (China proposed emergency talks in Beijing to deal with the current situation, US, ROK and Japan said 'no thanks, we'll have our own". That means they don't see China's influence as useful as it was 12 months ago and it also cuts Beijing out of jointly forming the response). That's not a very attractive outcome for Beijing.
Pyang asks for a lot from Beijing but it is receiving less and less these days. Still better to keep them onside but they are not the favourite son anymore. I'd suggest they haven't been since the 2009 nuke test.
Drizz
Likes Dirt
They bought the Varyag off the Russian years ago. According to Wiki its almost refitted and operational. I don't think they that far from having a few operational in the next ten years. Still no match to US with their "12" aircraft carrier and 50+ years operational experience.
I wondered if the latest Wikileak cables linking Berlusconi with Putin will put a stake into the Italian PM's career. Gosh! So wish Wikileaks leak a few more things, like how did Russia and Qatar won the 2018, 2022 World Cup!!
They've actually bought two of the Russians, I've been on to one of them and it aint going nowhere.
They're building their own. The mock flight deck and tower is in Wuhan and they have another flight deck elsewhere at altitude to practice windy landings and take offs. They have had a great deal of trouble with the steam launch system and a few other things, it will be a good while before it hits the water. Then it will be a good while before they have a strike fleet (carriers are useless without guided missile destroyers, etc). Then it will be a good while before they have basic shit like operational resup drills and simple maneuvering down pat. Then it will be a good while before they have a useful operational doctrine.
So all up we're talking at least 15 years before they have at least one carrier strike group that will be a match for one of the US carrier strike groups.....
According to the books I used to read as a kid, by then we will all be living on Mars under big glass domes and driving hover cars as robots bring us drinks. So, nothing to worry about.
They're building their own. The mock flight deck and tower is in Wuhan and they have another flight deck elsewhere at altitude to practice windy landings and take offs. They have had a great deal of trouble with the steam launch system and a few other things, it will be a good while before it hits the water. Then it will be a good while before they have a strike fleet (carriers are useless without guided missile destroyers, etc). Then it will be a good while before they have basic shit like operational resup drills and simple maneuvering down pat. Then it will be a good while before they have a useful operational doctrine.
So all up we're talking at least 15 years before they have at least one carrier strike group that will be a match for one of the US carrier strike groups.....
According to the books I used to read as a kid, by then we will all be living on Mars under big glass domes and driving hover cars as robots bring us drinks. So, nothing to worry about.