• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

You need to remember that you aren't any sort of expert on this subject.

Geez, you tell me

Do you think, you can physically take the country's infrastructure down SO far that it takes years to repair?

Given 70-75 people, who will do precisely what you tell them at precisely when you tell them, and where you tell them, You could take this country down to a point that it wil take about 4 weeks to get power back on to 55% of the populace, if the country is lucky.....72 people, less than a quarter million bux and

I would have at LEAST 3 levels of redundancy and reliability. You think thats possible?

3 people in each of 20 cities. And 15 people distributed amongst those same 20 cities, for back-up and redundancy. The country would come down SO hard that it'd take months to get power back to all, and after the first 3 days the depression would set in and our resource demands would be MUCH less than they were before.

Suffice to say, without "giving the enemy ideas" .... by taking down just a few very specific nodes within the Power and Communications Industries, you also get as a bonus, the water systems in the cities you chose, natural gas and oil transmission nationwide (did you know that there is ONE single MAIN pipeline system feeding the NorthEast over 3/4's of its natural gas and petroleum products?) If one selects the cities carefully, one also criples train service nationwide for several days AFTER the power gets restored. Power generation plants are NOT designed to come off line instantly and there would be SOME physical damage. PLUS, refineries which do not shut down in an orderly manner don't come back on line for months.

As interconnected as things are if one takes down the right combo of facilities in the right combo of cities fragile is too robust a description for our infrastructure.
 
This is so tedious. Do you have any understanding of international politics beyond what you're taught on FOX News? The fact that Nixon recognized that both peoples "understood" that there was but one China gives recognition to the PRC's claims and thus makes any agreement of defense we have with the ROC irrelevant. It's like saying that you want a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but understand that there is no such thing as Palestine. Is this really too hard for you to understand as a concept of two faced politics? Nixon paved the way for Carter by recognizing but 'one China'. Carter simply put the move on paper.


So the State Dept. is wrong....got it.....whew.


j-mac
 
Geez, you tell me

Do you think, you can physically take the country's infrastructure down SO far that it takes years to repair?

Given 70-75 people, who will do precisely what you tell them at precisely when you tell them, and where you tell them, You could take this country down to a point that it wil take about 4 weeks to get power back on to 55% of the populace, if the country is lucky.....72 people, less than a quarter million bux and

I would have at LEAST 3 levels of redundancy and reliability. You think thats possible?

3 people in each of 20 cities. And 15 people distributed amongst those same 20 cities, for back-up and redundancy. The country would come down SO hard that it'd take months to get power back to all, and after the first 3 days the depression would set in and our resource demands would be MUCH less than they were before.

Suffice to say, without "giving the enemy ideas" .... by taking down just a few very specific nodes within the Power and Communications Industries, you also get as a bonus, the water systems in the cities you chose, natural gas and oil transmission nationwide (did you know that there is ONE single MAIN pipeline system feeding the NorthEast over 3/4's of its natural gas and petroleum products?) If one selects the cities carefully, one also criples train service nationwide for several days AFTER the power gets restored. Power generation plants are NOT designed to come off line instantly and there would be SOME physical damage. PLUS, refineries which do not shut down in an orderly manner don't come back on line for months.

As interconnected as things are if one takes down the right combo of facilities in the right combo of cities fragile is too robust a description for our infrastructure.

tinfoil-hat.jpg


What does your response have to do with outright war with China?
 
What does your response have to do with outright war with China?

China doesn't have to win in the traditional sense.

All they need to do is drive us back about 40-50 years in resource needs.

And they don';t have to fire a BULLET to do that.

Understand that the chinese have been working for YEARS to be able to wage a true asymetrical war against the US. If all you are thinking about is the bullets and bombs and nukes and stuff, you won't win the battle against China.

If you are thinkng in terms of a multi-continent, multi-layered, virtual battle-space that includes cyber attacks against logistics, comms, power and Life Support Infrastructure (LSI), then you might be thinking in the right terms.
 
China doesn't have to win in the traditional sense.

All they need to do is drive us back about 40-50 years in resource needs.

And they don';t have to fire a BULLET to do that.

Understand that the chinese have been working for YEARS to be able to wage a true asymetrical war against the US. If all you are thinking about is the bullets and bombs and nukes and stuff, you won't win the battle against China.

If you are thinkng in terms of a multi-continent, multi-layered, virtual battle-space that includes cyber attacks against logistics, comms, power and Life Support Infrastructure (LSI), then you might be thinking in the right terms.

Yeah, but that's not what this thread is about. I already noted that China owns us economically, which is frankly---much scarier.
 
Also, Ric, why did you stop responding to this post?

Really. Which ones?

You need to remember that you aren't any sort of expert on this subject.

So? How would entering into a full-scale conflict with the U.S. benefit the Chinese military?

Yeah, I don't think you know what you're talking about here.

Okay. I don't see a lot of Americans supporting us entering into war with the Chinese over Taiwan. So then, my response is...so what?

Also, there is no such organization as the Sons of the American Confederacy. Do you mean SOCV? If so, you should be aware that the Sons of the Confederate Veterans aren't eager to go to war with the union again.
 
So the State Dept. is wrong....got it.....whew.


j-mac

No. You simply don't understand the historical context of events. Glad we got that figured out.
 
Also, Ric, why did you stop responding to this post?

The thread on O'Donnell was perky and firm, but your abrupt basement antics started to sag the thread. I'll respond and see if I can restore to an upright position this thread...

Really. Which ones?

Don't make the mistake of assuming that the chain of Commands in China, the military under the President. The mil actually out-ranks the President. The mil can give the president his marching orders.

So? How would entering into a full-scale conflict with the U.S. benefit the Chinese military?

Barring any regime change or liberal revolution in China, or any sort of resource revolution (like an affordable and abundant alternative energy source) that will benefit all nations involved, conflict is all but inevitable between the US and China. The only real questions are when, where, and under what other circumstances it will take place. If they make a move, it is because they feel they can survive it. Panama - they now own 80% of the controlling interests along the canal. They could effectively shut down the canal, which means the Atlantic fleets could not join the Pacific fleets as quickly. They have been eyeing the Spratleys...

The Spratleys may be a launching point at a future date for a conflict in the area; I personally think that this is more likely than a mainland invasion of Taiwan. Taiwan is a tough target; with more naval force, the Spratleys are easy pickings. Taiwan would be a great political and moral victory from the Chinese perspective, but the Spratleys and their oil will at some point appear to the Chinese to be too vital not to incorporate. Only problem for them is that they're not the only great regional power who wants 'em and I've heard that their sub warfare tactics involve defending them. And they just recently purchased their first nuclear-powered subs from Russia (within the last 2 years I think) which doesn't put them on par with us, but definitely improves their odds in a conflict.

Conflict between the US and China is inevitable on the present course, but so is conflict between India and China as well. They already have unresolved border disputes, and with this added pressure it is only a matter of time. In 1999 India announced that it would be increasing its presence in the South China Sea. Their leaders have apparently determined that they are in the same boat as China - that their energy consumption will eventially outstrip their ability to obtain supplies, so they need to increase the supply at some point. They have been beefing up their navy as China has as a result.

Given their rates of consumption (both China and India), India in the South China Sea will become their first major conflict point, before the beef between us and the Chinese comes to a head.
 
China doesn't have to win in the traditional sense.

All they need to do is drive us back about 40-50 years in resource needs.

And they don';t have to fire a BULLET to do that.

Understand that the chinese have been working for YEARS to be able to wage a true asymetrical war against the US. If all you are thinking about is the bullets and bombs and nukes and stuff, you won't win the battle against China.

If you are thinkng in terms of a multi-continent, multi-layered, virtual battle-space that includes cyber attacks against logistics, comms, power and Life Support Infrastructure (LSI), then you might be thinking in the right terms.

Response:


Oh no. We've lost civilian electricity in many cities. Guess what? Our nukes still work, assholes!

edit: And what the hell does China stand to gain from this bizarre conspiracy? We'll never pay back those loans if they attack us, and they don't have the ability to invade us so it's not like they can capture resources. You've said why there will be conflict, but what does China stand to gain from escalation to a war? Also, that Panama thing is hilarious. You think Panama is going to refuse passage to a carrier battle group?

Panama is going to interfere with critical US military operations and aid America's enemies openly? Wow.
 
Last edited:
If China were to take over the USA what would the ramifications be on the Chinese mail order bride industry?
 
If China were to take over the USA what would the ramifications be on the Chinese mail order bride industry?

Hmm. Just to be safe, I'd better sell my stock in human trafficking legitimate companionship companies.
 
If you are just coming to a point when you ask what China's long term goald are you have no idea of what Chins as been going from the very day that President Nixon opened China to trade, you have not been paying attention.

In general all Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Maoist to survive must expand in natural, agricultural, manufacturing, and human resources of face implosion because the System drains all of these resources domestically, along with all the incentives of those who once were the RICH who were over Taxed in order to fulfill the whole manta: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

It comes to a point when the system collapses and there are no more rich or pecieved rich to take from to give to those who take but contribute little.

End of story, O'Donnell got it right. There is no greater prize on earth than th U.S.A. that is what the Soviet Union had in mind before it's collapse.
 
no, I think Dan would rather have fiscal conservatives running the show.

Not bat **** crazy social Conservatives who believe masterbation is a sin against god, china is pllotting to take over the US, and that condoms spread AIDS in Africa...

At this point in history I could care less if she's a wiccan ogre princesss that believes I should be struck by lightning for wackin off as long as she is willing to help get spending under control and roll back some of the social programs that have been enacted.

Priorities here....
 
Oh no. We've lost civilian electricity in many cities. Guess what? Our nukes still work, assholes!

China (the masters of the smiling F-You). Remember the whole ordeal when the spy plane went down? They talked smack until they had seen what they wanted then smiled and gave it all back....

It would not surprise me to see us lose a ship or three at the hands of the Chinese military. We would rage and threaten them with some form of retaliation. To which they will smile and tell us to give them our best shot. We might threaten them with our nuclear arsenal, but it would astound me if the Chinese leaders didn't respond with something along the lines of, "We are willing to sacrifice several million lives in order to secure our future, are you? We can hit Seattle, Portland and L.A. in the next half hour if you like..."




edit: And what the hell does China stand to gain from this bizarre conspiracy? We'll never pay back those loans if they attack us, and they don't have the ability to invade us so it's not like they can capture resources. You've said why there will be conflict, but what does China stand to gain from escalation to a war? Also, that Panama thing is hilarious. You think Panama is going to refuse passage to a carrier battle group?

Panama is going to interfere with critical US military operations and aid America's enemies openly? Wow.

What should disturb you is our lack of self reliance in critical industries. Think about WWII. Almost everything we needed for war was produced here. Now, what percentage of components in our weapons systems come from other countries? What percentage comes from the very people that we may one day fight?
 
If China were to take over the USA what would the ramifications be on the Chinese mail order bride industry?

China is the one country I wouldn't be surprised if it used US technology nukes in it's battleplan.
 
If you are just coming to a point when you ask what China's long term goald are you have no idea of what Chins as been going from the very day that President Nixon opened China to trade, you have not been paying attention.

In general all Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Maoist to survive must expand in natural, agricultural, manufacturing, and human resources of face implosion because the System drains all of these resources domestically, along with all the incentives of those who once were the RICH who were over Taxed in order to fulfill the whole manta: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

It comes to a point when the system collapses and there are no more rich or pecieved rich to take from to give to those who take but contribute little.

End of story, O'Donnell got it right. There is no greater prize on earth than th U.S.A. that is what the Soviet Union had in mind before it's collapse.

And then you went insane :)
 
China (the masters of the smiling F-You). Remember the whole ordeal when the spy plane went down? They talked smack until they had seen what they wanted then smiled and gave it all back....

It would not surprise me to see us lose a ship or three at the hands of the Chinese military. We would rage and threaten them with some form of retaliation. To which they will smile and tell us to give them our best shot. We might threaten them with our nuclear arsenal, but it would astound me if the Chinese leaders didn't respond with something along the lines of, "We are willing to sacrifice several million lives in order to secure our future, are you? We can hit Seattle, Portland and L.A. in the next half hour if you like..."






What should disturb you is our lack of self reliance in critical industries. Think about WWII. Almost everything we needed for war was produced here. Now, what percentage of components in our weapons systems come from other countries? What percentage comes from the very people that we may one day fight?

You're still dodging the fundamental question: What does China stand to gain from this war, and how is that supposed to offset the devastating damage they'll suffer as a result?
 
You're still dodging the fundamental question: What does China stand to gain from this war, and how is that supposed to offset the devastating damage they'll suffer as a result?

It is a huge error to assume that other cultures and other nations have the same values, same motivations and use the same logic that we do. In some areas, yes. But we are more different than we are alike.

There is another political/economic truism that is largely unknown. Any organization, company or nation becomes in effect a living organism that responds and acts like any other living organism. It is something that is observed from the highest to the lowest level.

An organism seeks to control its environment as much as possible to optimize conditions for its continued survival and growth. Pay attention to that last word. Growth. Any organism which does not grow will eventually succumb to those organisms that do grow and eventually become larger and stronger.

Read up on Chinese history both old and modern - full of proof that the lives of their citizens are not important to the government

Slaughtering millions in the cultural revolution, killing protesters in Tiananmen Square, prisoners labor in slave labor camps and when they die or are executed, their organs are harvested.

Deuce - Chinese government is perfectly willing to trade the lives of millions upon millions of their people in a nuclear war with the US if they think it will result in the ascension of China and the fall of the US.

Our government would never do that....
 
It is a huge error to assume that other cultures and other nations have the same values, same motivations and use the same logic that we do. In some areas, yes. But we are more different than we are alike.

There is another political/economic truism that is largely unknown. Any organization, company or nation becomes in effect a living organism that responds and acts like any other living organism. It is something that is observed from the highest to the lowest level.

An organism seeks to control its environment as much as possible to optimize conditions for its continued survival and growth. Pay attention to that last word. Growth. Any organism which does not grow will eventually succumb to those organisms that do grow and eventually become larger and stronger.

Read up on Chinese history both old and modern - full of proof that the lives of their citizens are not important to the government

Slaughtering millions in the cultural revolution, killing protesters in Tiananmen Square, prisoners labor in slave labor camps and when they die or are executed, their organs are harvested.

Deuce - Chinese government is perfectly willing to trade the lives of millions upon millions of their people in a nuclear war with the US if they think it will result in the ascension of China and the fall of the US.

Our government would never do that....

So once again, you're arguments are complete folly.

The nuclear war won't just kill millions and millions of Chinese citizens. It will kill most chinese citizens, and most American citizens. It will turn both countries into unhabitable barren radioactive wastelands.

And so the question is. After all that what does China gain?

And there is, the fundemental flaw in your terribly thought out argument.

Fear is strong in you.
 
larger point being she is garnishing this much attention.

conservatives will vote non-democrat when the entire midterm elections are a referendum on Obama. Liberals will try to save face and vote non-tea party / conservative. no news there.

problem for dems is 60% of the people who voted for Obama never saw the inside of a voting booth before Obama and probably never will again.
the x factor.
 
larger point being she is garnishing this much attention.

conservatives will vote non-democrat when the entire midterm elections are a referendum on Obama. Liberals will try to save face and vote non-tea party / conservative. no news there.

problem for dems is 60% of the people who voted for Obama never saw the inside of a voting booth before Obama and probably never will again.
the x factor.

In this particular race, the polling shows you to be wrong.
 
So once again, you're arguments are complete folly.

The nuclear war won't just kill millions and millions of Chinese citizens. It will kill most chinese citizens, and most American citizens. It will turn both countries into unhabitable barren radioactive wastelands.

And so the question is. After all that what does China gain?

And there is, the fundemental flaw in your terribly thought out argument.

Fear is strong in you.

Fear, folly, fundamental flaw, etc, etc....Thats all you have to counter? Sad, really. Saying it is fear, folly, flaw is not much of an argument. Explaining why it is fear, folly, flaw is.

Again, you don't understand terrorists or terrorism and before, I continue there is enough unaccounted for plutonium to make several bombs. Nuclear material is readily available from the former Soviet Union and from N. Korea. Period



The bombers on 9/11 killed a couple of thousand people. That was not the successful part of the operation. The successful part was shutting down travel in this nation for a week and the economic disruptions. The cost since then can be counted in the billions. It is counted in the millions who changed their lives and were afraid to travel or visit possible target cities. The goal of a terrorist attack is to create terror. To cause a change. The actual number of deaths is merely a collateral effect....
 
Fear, folly, fundamental flaw, etc, etc....Thats all you have to counter? Sad, really. Saying it is fear, folly, flaw is not much of an argument. Explaining why it is fear, folly, flaw is.

Again, you don't understand terrorists or terrorism and before, I continue there is enough unaccounted for plutonium to make several bombs. Nuclear material is readily available from the former Soviet Union and from N. Korea. Period



The bombers on 9/11 killed a couple of thousand people. That was not the successful part of the operation. The successful part was shutting down travel in this nation for a week and the economic disruptions. The cost since then can be counted in the billions. It is counted in the millions who changed their lives and were afraid to travel or visit possible target cities. The goal of a terrorist attack is to create terror. To cause a change. The actual number of deaths is merely a collateral effect....

So basically you didn't prove me wrong.

Instead of finding a way to prove me wrong about the assertion that niether the Chinese or America have anything to gain from a genocidal destructive nuclear war that would destroy both countries...

You start talking about terrorism and other things that have nothing to do with the OP or your original point....

Fantastic.
 
Back
Top Bottom