23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in war

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in war

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by chrono117 » Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:00 am

Maybe that's what all those "ghost cities" China built are for. After all their cities are destroyed in a nuclear war, the survivors can move there and restart.

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by John » Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:20 am

For what it's worth, Pakistan, Cambodia and some other countries will be allied with China.

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by solomani » Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:37 am

A war with the USA -hot or cold- will lead to China's destruction. In the sense that China will have regime change (like eastern bloc countries) or dismemberment (like the USSSR). I do not expect nuclear exchange of any type no matter what China says.

I also think China would lose a regional war against combined minor powers like Japan, Vietnam and the Philipines. Throw in India and its definitely game over.

This doesn't mean there won't be proxy wars or economic battles during this new Cold War like period.

Do you have more information on the "war" China won against the Philipines?

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by Reality Check » Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:56 am

OLD1953 wrote:I have to think they mistranslated "will" as "knowledge" in that article about the Phillipines.
I had the same initial thought. But after doing some more research I located more complete quotes. That part of the sentence ( the knowledge part ) when viewed along with the paragraph around it, and the paragraphs before and after it makes perfect sense. China is saying that they understand the Law of the Sea better than the Philippines.

The part of the sentence that is disturbing is when they use words indicating that the Philippines will be grievously hurt by that lack of knowledge.

It is like a an armed mugger holding a gun on someone and saying: "If you do, or say, anything I do not like, I will call you a bad name and you will regret having said, or done something I did not like, for the rest of your short life".

It is China turning what is otherwise a statement of a legal position into a thinly veiled threat of violence.

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by Reality Check » Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:36 am

solomani wrote:
Agree totally. War now for China will lead to destruction of China.
All wars ? Of all kinds? that China participates in, will lead to the destruction of China ?

Some would say that China already won one war with the Philippines.

China was reported to be mobilizing for war with the Philippines, the U.S. negotiated a "deal" whereby by China and the Philippines both refrained from visiting the disputed reef with "government vessels from either side".

China has since operated government vessels in the seas around the disputed reef and prevented Philippine fishermen from fishing there, as the Filipinos had done for decades before the dispute. The Philippines has avoided sending any government vessels into the area to avoid being accused of violating the agreement and giving China an excuse to attack.

Some would say that China won that war. Clearly that war, if it was a war, did not destroy China.

Do you mean a short, brief, shooting war between say the Philippines and China that ends in a cease fire negotiated by Obama which freezes everything in place and creates a de-facto war zone where countries other than China are too afraid to explore for oil or other resources in the permanent "war zone" created by the cease fire. That would be a win for China resulting from a war where China was not destroyed.

Do you mean a one sided thermonuclear war between China and Vietnam where Vietnam pays a very high price and afterward a "neutral" Communist government, that does not side with any country against China, takes power in Vietnam. If China avoided a nuclear war with anybody but a few countries that had no nuclear arms, would that bring about the destruction of China?

If China engaged in a thermonuclear war with India where India exhausted their Thermonuclear weapons and then sued for peace, would that destroy China?

If China started a brief shooting war with Japan and it ended with a negotiated ceasefire under threat of nuclear war on Japan ( who has no thermonuclear arsenal ) by China ( who has the worlds third largest thermonuclear arsenal ) and it ends without Japan gaining any territory, and with the dispute over existing Japanese territories remaining unresolved, would that result in the destruction of China?

Only a full scale thermonuclear war between the United States and China, or between Russia and China would result in the partial destruction of both combatants. Under those conditions China would be destroyed ( at least partially ). But even a limited thermonuclear war where China did not surrender unconditionally would leave China the most populous country on earth with one of the largest economies and one of the most powerful military machines and one of the largest thermonuclear arsenals.

You, or I, may, believe the above scenarios are unlikely, but China may rationally believe that all aggressive scenarios will, in the long term, be in their favor because they are on the rise and the west is in decline. The sooner they act, the sooner they can lock up more world resources for themselves.

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by OLD1953 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:43 am

I have to think they mistranslated "will" as "knowledge" in that article about the Phillipines.

I strongly believe the US will not go to war with China for Vietnam unless Vietnam manages to sign a mutual defense treaty before China attacks. I also strongly believe the US would fight in whatever manner was indicated if China attacked any nation which has such a treaty. Extreme nationalism and partisanship lead to echo chamber thinking, where all anyone hears is the yes men shouting approval for whatever nonsense is the order of the day. The Chinese military and new party leaders seem to have really gone down that rabbit hole.

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by solomani » Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:00 am

One other comment, I noticed on a few updates that you mention the USA/middle-eastern countries joining the USA in alliance. What makes you say that? Is it because picking China would open them up to conquest/retaliation from the WAllies ("Western Allies" which I just use for short-hand for the USA and her allies).

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by solomani » Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:08 am


A consultant to the Pentagon and author of The Rise of China Versus The Logic of Strategy, Edward Luttwak, said China was ''grossly overestimating'' its military capability and underestimating the regional response.
Agree totally. War now for China will lead to destruction of China.

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by solomani » Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:03 am

Reality Check wrote:
solomani wrote:
China also assumes AU has no nuclear capacity. I expect if they made that bet they would lose.
What would be the point of having a very limited nuclear capability, and keeping it totally secret ???

Israel does not officially acknowledge having nuclear weapons, but they also make sure the whole world knows they have plenty of them.

Such limited stock piles are only good as deterrent or using them for a surprise, sneak attack on a country with very few, or a country with none.
It's a "well known secret" that the US has nukes in AU. At least within military circles. How many I have no idea. Australia also has the capability to build them. Finally a leaked document from years ago showed that one defensive plan for an invasion was to use tactical nukes to cripple the enemy army. That would imply AU has some nuclear capability.

It's all rumors of course but would you be surprised?

Re: 23-Jan-13 WV-China warns Australia not side w/ U.S. in w

by Reality Check » Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:37 am

solomani wrote:
China also assumes AU has no nuclear capacity. I expect if they made that bet they would lose.
What would be the point of having a very limited nuclear capability, and keeping it totally secret ???

Israel does not officially acknowledge having nuclear weapons, but they also make sure the whole world knows they have plenty of them.

Such limited stock piles are only good as deterrent or using them for a surprise, sneak attack on a country with very few, or a country with none.

Top