Page 10 of 21 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 204

Thread: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

  1. #91
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Why is being called 'stupid' offensive? I think you should take it as a sign that you need to better yourself. Not an insult. There is a cure. It's called logic. Your beliefs as illogical and thus to me they're nothing more than the rantings of somebody who is currently 'stupid'.
    Attack/discredit the messenger because the message is uncomfortable to you?...

    Why don't you attack my message?

  2. #92
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Thats why its important, the US stays ahead of the curve
    The reality is that power remains the principal safeguard against war. To draw from Henry Kissinger, there is no historic evidence that "peace is the normal condition among states." While democracy, international law, treaties, relationships, etc., can mitigate the risk of war, they cannot completely substitute for a lack of sufficient power when critical national interests clash. China keenly understands the importance of the balance of power. U.S. policy makers would do well to do the same, as the world is not an idealistic place nor is it unipolar.

    Having said all that, I don't believe war is the most likely outcome even as China gains power. At present, a Sino-U.S. war would inflict substantial damage on both parties (even excluding a nuclear exchange). The benefits don't outweigh the costs for either side. Power realities promote deterrence of conflict. Nonetheless, there are some critical differences in interests e.g., Taiwan. There is common agreement in favor of a unified China by peaceful means. But should China seek to pursue unity through force, the rules could change. One could argue that the U.S. would ultimately blink and step aside from such a conflict. But doing so would imperil critical U.S. interests ranging from relationships with major trading partners i.e., Japan and South Korea, that would be demoralized by U.S. abdication, to open passage in vital shipping lanes. Under such a scenario, one could reasonably expect renewed arms races in East Asia and likely greater instability as U.S. abdication would create a dangerous power vacuum. Hence, my guess is that risky as a military operation would be, the U.S. would intervene in the case of a China-Taiwan conflict unless Taiwan acted to provoke the conflict e.g., by openly asserting its independence.

    We are also becoming rivals for the same resource, oil. The world isn't close to running out of oil, so the price of oil hasn't gone up because of low supply, rather its higher demand. That and the fact that we haven't built a new oil refinery in 30 years.
    That's another future faultline. In a future where resource scarcity is one plausible scenario, resource nationalism could assert itself. China's growing navy reflects China's desire to assure reliable access to natural resources, especially oil. China's relationship with Iran also reflects such dependence, as well.

    Already, there were reports that China had simply halted shipments of rare earth minerals to Japan to extract the release of a Chinese ship captain. China initially refused to comment (confirmation would have triggered a trade dispute at the WTO) and later denied any policy change. That allowed China to exert leverage and avoid a trade war. China, in other words, is a keen practioner of power politics.

    Finally, one has to understand that China's desire to strengthen itself is also a function of a long, tortured past that saw alternating periods of power and weakness, sometimes destructive fragmentation and instability. China very much craves stability and is seeking to translate its growing economic power into the broader means of assuring itself the kind of stability that had proved all too fleeting in its past.

  3. #93
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    The message is schlock, you dont seem to get that and now the attention is turned towards you.

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Attack/discredit the messenger because the message is uncomfortable to you?...

    Why don't you attack my message?
    Your message is stupid and without any basis in fact or logic.

    Feel better?

  5. #95
    Voluntary Resignation

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    11-30-10 @ 05:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,059

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    China already published a book on the 9/11 attacks, a few years before they happened. Written by a pair of Chinese Generals. They think long term. By the way, they already have aircraft carriers, and are rapidly getting more from the Russians. They think differently from us, and have the hands in all the pockets here already.

    There have been public statements by Chinese military leadership about how they'll vaporize L.A. if we don't give them Taiwan. In China those guys get promoted. Here they'd get fired and be forced to attend a Chinese cultural awareness seminar.
    Amazon.com: Unrestricted Warfare: China's Master Plan to Destroy America (9780971680722): Qiao Liang, Wang Xiangsui: Books

    Once again, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. The book simply says that to beat the US one has to think outside the box. Some clown at WND slapped a picture of the WTC on the front in 2002, cashed in on the fears of "yellow peril" and laughed all the way to the bank.

    Yes, they think differently than you. You just fail to demonstrate a grasp of how it is that they think.

    As to generals, how many generals in the US run around making such statements about other countries? Lots, and it's all just a bunch of talk. Fortunately people with a much stronger grasp on reality than you have the reigns of the PLA in hand.

    I suggest you retreat to the ME forum where you actually know what the **** you're talking about.

  6. #96
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,050

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Attack/discredit the messenger because the message is uncomfortable to you?...

    Why don't you attack my message?
    I did. I explained that there is absolutely no logic to a Chinese attack on the U.S. - China would end up losing more economically and socially than the U.S. - not only would the U.S. government decide to declare our debt to China as no longer existing, we would also essentially ruin China from an economic perspective as - gasp - we're their MAIN CUSTOMERS. See why your argument is illogical yet? It has nothing to do with history. It has to do with your basic understanding of what is economically profiting on a global scale.

    Invading the only people who buy from you in bulk and are responsible for most of your growth? Not politically savvy.

    Not invading the only people who buy from you in bulk and are responsible for most of your growth? Politically savvy.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 10-05-10 at 02:16 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #97
    Voluntary Resignation

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    11-30-10 @ 05:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,059

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Finally, one has to understand that China's desire to strengthen itself is also a function of a long, tortured past that saw alternating periods of power and weakness, sometimes destructive fragmentation and instability. China very much craves stability and is seeking to translate its growing economic power into the broader means of assuring itself the kind of stability that had proved all too fleeting in its past.
    QED.

    China has been the world's bitch for way too long. Think about the Opium Wars. Think about the situation with Imperial Japan prior to WWII. They want to a) get back to controlling their own destiny, and b) be left alone.

  8. #98
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    Dan's not a social Conservative.

    Dan is a Fiscal Conservative.
    In other words, he's a "True" conservative...just not a wacko right-winger
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  9. #99
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post

    Having said all that, I don't believe war is the most likely outcome even as China gains power. At present, a Sino-U.S. war would inflict substantial damage on both parties (even excluding a nuclear exchange). The benefits don't outweigh the costs for either side. Power realities promote deterrence of conflict. Nonetheless, there are some critical differences in interests e.g., Taiwan. There is common agreement in favor of a unified China by peaceful means. But should China seek to pursue unity through force, the rules could change. One could argue that the U.S. would ultimately blink and step aside from such a conflict. But doing so would imperil critical U.S. interests ranging from relationships with major trading partners i.e., Japan and South Korea, that would be demoralized by U.S. abdication, to open passage in vital shipping lanes. Under such a scenario, one could reasonably expect renewed arms races in East Asia and likely greater instability as U.S. abdication would create a dangerous power vacuum. Hence, my guess is that risky as a military operation would be, the U.S. would intervene in the case of a China-Taiwan conflict unless Taiwan acted to provoke the conflict e.g., by openly asserting its independence.
    A couple of years ago.....China bought an aircraft carrier from Russia and is in the process of refurbishing it, as well as developing carrier aircraft. If they can put together a carrier battle group, supported by land based aircraft and missles from China, they could deny us a presence in the South China Sea. It isn't the best territory for big, deep water nuke subs and we don't have our smaller, littoral water subs built yet.

    It also reminds me of the silly uproar about the Dubai ports deal. We're all concerned about a pretty legit Arab company running a port in Jersey, (since no US company can afford the Union ass raping) while the Chinese army owns the Panama Canal, and most of the ports on the West Coast.

    That's another future faultline. In a future where resource scarcity is one plausible scenario, resource nationalism could assert itself. China's growing navy reflects China's desire to assure reliable access to natural resources, especially oil. China's relationship with Iran also reflects such dependence, as well.

    Already, there were reports that China had simply halted shipments of rare earth minerals to Japan to extract the release of a Chinese ship captain. China initially refused to comment (confirmation would have triggered a trade dispute at the WTO) and later denied any policy change. That allowed China to exert leverage and avoid a trade war. China, in other words, is a keen practioner of power politics.

    Finally, one has to understand that China's desire to strengthen itself is also a function of a long, tortured past that saw alternating periods of power and weakness, sometimes destructive fragmentation and instability. China very much craves stability and is seeking to translate its growing economic power into the broader means of assuring itself the kind of stability that had proved all too fleeting in its past.
    I suspect the conflict will arise due to a grab of resources. China is growing thirsty on an industrial level not seen since the '50s. Unfortunately for us, their military will likely be complete with its modernization.

    China knows that if they lost a few hundred million in a war with the US, they dont give a rats ass. However, lose a few hundred million citizens in the USA, and it's a disaster. China has been building up it's military power for the past few years using dollars they made off us selling us tools, tv's and clothing. The American consumer is basically financing the Chinese military.

    And on the "War on Terror"....The only real winner of this War on Terror is China. the Islamists will keep hitting us and teh US can't really win with the rules as they are.

    China however sits and grows through it all while our attention is elsewhere.

  10. #100
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,274

    Re: O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    The US would be absolutely nucking futs to go to war to protect Taiwan from the mainland. That is definitely not going to trigger WWIII.
    Do we, or do we not have a treaty to protect Taiwan against Chinese aggression?


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 10 of 21 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •