China Versus USA

[colddiesel]

Is China a fundamental security threat to the USA? I can see that idealogically they are no fit, They are clearly a trade rival, and the size of their economy is set to exceed that of the USA's within a decade. But a fundamental military/security threat, how do they in any sense threaten the US homeland.

 

[Lazaran]

Is China a fundamental security threat to the USA? But a fundamental military/security threat, how do they in any sense threaten the US homeland.

That ^ is the dumbest (apparently rhetorical) question ever posted on the PB.

Congratulations!!!



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[TheGxForum]

Is China a fundamental security threat to the USA? I can see that idealogically they are no fit, They are clearly a trade rival, and the size of their economy is set to exceed that of the USA's within a decade. But a fundamental military/security threat, how do they in any sense threaten the US homeland.

The same way any rival gang/government/pig culture group/cartel/syndicate is threatened when others don't submit to them the more they want to police them...

 

[ll74]

The war between the US and China is not military.

This is the war and the US is losing even as our President thinks he is winning

What to Know About China’s Halt of Rare Earth Exports​

Since early April, China has stopped almost all shipments of critical minerals that are needed for cars, robots, wind turbines, jet fighters and other technologies.

 

[Lance_Castro]

The Chinese already own the USA.
Lol

 

[ll74]

Insightful

 

[HisArpy]

Or, you know, because China has plans of total global conquest and domination...

 

[TheGxForum]

The Chinese already own the USA.
Lol

Nah they just own most of the US debt(bonds)...

 

[colddiesel]

That ^ is the dumbest (apparently rhetorical) question ever posted on the PB.

Congratulations!!!



We. Told. Them. So.

No it is not dumb in the slightest, unless your notion of rhetorical is bent out of shape. Currently China's military is largely restricted to its land borders and the sea within 500 miles of its coastline. On the other hand the USA has a string of bases and Allies in Korea, Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, plus it controls the Chinese trade routes through the Straits of Malacca and the entrance to the Red sea from Diego Garcia with further US dominated bottlenecks in the Med, at Suez and Gibraltar. So long as the USA avoids a land war with China the air and sea superiority of the USA will remain. For this reason the USA will support Taiwan with arms and rhetoric but never get involved in actual fighting. China has a large number of ships but nowhere near enough in either number or quality to project power into the Pacific and no-where near the USA.

China's strongest card in dealing with the USA is not military at all but is the sheer size of its holdings in US Treasury Bonds. America had the Japanese as its required enemy in the 1940's then the USSR post war. China is definitely competition for the USA industrially and in Trade but militarily it just doesn't add up. But she does serve a useful purpose as a target to blame by US politicians for their own domestic failures.

It's also worth considering that China has recovered all the land (Hong Kong, Macau? and various treaty ports inflicted on them in the 19th century leaving only one area in dispute. Russia took 950,000Sq Km from China in the Amur Basin and has never handed it back. Should the USA encourage the Chinese to get stuck into a war in Eastern Siberia. It might make sense.

So yes Lazaran Chinese International interests are worth close study well beyond scapegoating and grievance whining.

 

[Lazaran]

No it is not dumb in the slightest, unless your notion of rhetorical is bent out of shape. Currently China's military is largely restricted to its land borders and the sea within 500 miles of its coastline. On the other hand the USA has a string of bases and Allies in Korea, Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, plus it controls the Chinese trade routes through the Straits of Malacca and the entrance to the Red sea from Diego Garcia with further US dominated bottlenecks in the Med, at Suez and Gibraltar. So long as the USA avoids a land war with China the air and sea superiority of the USA will remain. For this reason the USA will support Taiwan with arms and rhetoric but never get involved in actual fighting. China has a large number of ships but nowhere near enough in either number or quality to project power into the Pacific and no-where near the USA.

China's strongest card in dealing with the USA is not military at all but is the sheer size of its holdings in US Treasury Bonds. America had the Japanese as its required enemy in the 1940's then the USSR post war. China is definitely competition for the USA industrially and in Trade but militarily it just doesn't add up. But she does serve a useful purpose as a target to blame by US politicians for their own domestic failures.

It's also worth considering that China has recovered all the land (Hong Kong, Macau? and various treaty ports inflicted on them in the 19th century leaving only one area in dispute. Russia took 950,000Sq Km from China in the Amur Basin and has never handed it back. Should the USA encourage the Chinese to get stuck into a war in Eastern Siberia. It might make sense.

So yes Lazaran Chinese International interests are worth close study well beyond scapegoating and grievance whining.

Two things:

1) Germany (and the two other Axis powers) on the eve of WWII.

2) The changing face of warfare and what constitutes a “fundamental security threat”..



“Is China a fundamental security threat to the USA?”



Um, YEAAAAAAHH!!!



Hope that ^ helps.

 

[ChloeTzang]

China Arms a Container Ship | Strategic Use | First Strike | Cost Effective | Expendable

Return of the Q ship......

 

[ChloeTzang]

China's New Military Equipment Revealed - The PLA Parade and its Modernisation Speed Run

The modernisation of the People's Liberation Army has been dramatic, rapid, and occasionally secretive.

Earlier this month, we got a bit of a window into the equipment side of that transformation process, with Beijing opting to show of dozens of weapon systems (many for the first time publicly) as part of their commemoration of the 80th anniversary of Japan's 1945 defeat.

From the start of the 21st Century the PRC has transitioned from being overwhelmingly reliant on derivatives of Soviet and Russian platforms to a country capable of pushing forward with its own designs supported by the world's largest manufacturing base.

Today, I look at a selection of those designs and ask what they can tell us about where the PLA is in its modernisation journey, and where it might be going in the future.

 

[Wilson23]

If this is a war, I call dibs on Shanghai!

It would burn so pretty!

 

[Hel_Books]

No it is not dumb in the slightest, unless your notion of rhetorical is bent out of shape. Currently China's military is largely restricted to its land borders and the sea within 500 miles of its coastline. On the other hand the USA has a string of bases and Allies in Korea, Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, plus it controls the Chinese trade routes through the Straits of Malacca and the entrance to the Red sea from Diego Garcia with further US dominated bottlenecks in the Med, at Suez and Gibraltar. So long as the USA avoids a land war with China the air and sea superiority of the USA will remain. For this reason the USA will support Taiwan with arms and rhetoric but never get involved in actual fighting. China has a large number of ships but nowhere near enough in either number or quality to project power into the Pacific and no-where near the USA.

China's strongest card in dealing with the USA is not military at all but is the sheer size of its holdings in US Treasury Bonds. America had the Japanese as its required enemy in the 1940's then the USSR post war. China is definitely competition for the USA industrially and in Trade but militarily it just doesn't add up. But she does serve a useful purpose as a target to blame by US politicians for their own domestic failures.

It's also worth considering that China has recovered all the land (Hong Kong, Macau? and various treaty ports inflicted on them in the 19th century leaving only one area in dispute. Russia took 950,000Sq Km from China in the Amur Basin and has never handed it back. Should the USA encourage the Chinese to get stuck into a war in Eastern Siberia. It might make sense.

So yes Lazaran Chinese International interests are worth close study well beyond scapegoating and grievance whining.

Ideally, China would gradually become more prosperous, its people more inclined to lead the good life than sending their children off to disastrous wars against Taiwan or the Philippines or whoever might "offend" Xi or whatever dictator succeeds him.

On the other hand, China could start irresponsibly throwing its weight around, like Russia is doing in Ukraine, or the USA is doing by blowing up defenceless little boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific.

It will take skilled diplomacy to lead the 21st century to peace and prosperity.

Unfortunately, from Russian warmongering to European dithering to Chinese paranoia and adventurism to the USA's kakistocracy, things don't look so well right about now.

 

[Wilson23]

Do we HAFTA rape Chinese women in this war?

I guess after the Japanese, they'll feel neglected if we don't . . .

 

[Rightguide]

Militarily, China’s growing capabilities directly threaten America’s outer defense perimeter, particularly in the Pacific and around key allies like Japan. Their advances in missile technology, naval power, and anti-access/area denial strategies aim to limit US military freedom of movement in the region. China also threatens the security of the free world’s critical semiconductor production centered in Taiwan.

 

[Rightguide]

China's strongest card in dealing with the USA is not military at all but is the sheer size of its holdings in US Treasury Bonds. America had the Japanese as its required enemy in the 1940's then the USSR post war. China is definitely competition for the USA industrially and in Trade but militarily it just doesn't add up. But she does serve a useful purpose as a target to blame by US politicians for their own domestic failures.

China’s holdings of US Treasury bonds are significant, but they’re a double-edged sword,China depends on the stability of the US economy just as much as the US is exposed to Chinese debt. This financial interdependence limits the ability of either side to use it as a true leverage point without risking serious damage to themselves.

 

[Wilson23]

So now we're going to war with Venezuela, Nigeria and China ALL AT THE SAME TIME?

 

[Chernosoth]

China was a threat to itself. Now it is past the threat stage. It is destroying itself. In desperation to escape self-destruction, it could be a little bit of a threat to other nations. National leaders who see that coming have some time to build firewalls and disentangle their economies.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Militarily, China’s growing capabilities directly threaten America’s outer defense perimeter, particularly in the Pacific and around key allies like Japan. Their advances in missile technology, naval power, and anti-access/area denial strategies aim to limit US military freedom of movement in the region. China also threatens the security of the free world’s critical semiconductor production centered in Taiwan.

Bingo.

The moment China perfected the hypersonic missile, the aircraft carrier was obsolete.
(History repeats itself, the aircraft carrier made the battleship obsolete).


By most estimates, China now has a three to four year head start on military technology, while grizzled white American admirals and feckless clueless presidents argue over the color schemes of new aircraft carriers. And then general public ooohs and ahhs over the latest "Top Gun" reboot and wants more airplanes (airplanes which are being replaced by much cheaper more efficient drones).

China is using their lead to invest heavily in rare metal production, one of the rare instances (pun semi-intended) where communism has a decided edge over capitalism). Why? Because rare metals (with the notable exception of lithium) requires a dedicated ultra high voltage power grid, on a scale that capitalism cannot match, because the return on investment in infrastructure is virtually non-existant. The US government funds its own very limited ultrahigh voltage network to refine rare earth metals, but the output is strictly for military needs.

The net result is that China has a virtual monopoly on the trade of refined rare earth minerals, which is used in spacecraft, high end satellites, and high end technology everywhere.

The gap in rare earth refinement is growing daily and America (and most of the free world, to be honest) lacks the political will to fund what it considers a "nice to have, not need to have" exotic infrastructure.

 

[RobDownSouth]

China conducted it's first-ever flight of a "Drone Mothership" last week.
It was successful.

American admirals still debating the color of porthole curtains in the new aircraft carrier captain's quarters.

 

[Wilson23]

Militarily, China’s growing capabilities directly threaten America’s outer defense perimeter, particularly in the Pacific and around key allies like Japan.

The U.S. has no business maintaining a defense perimeter in Asia.