• 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!

China threatens nuclear war with U.S.

John V

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
583
Reaction score
199
Location
China
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sandwiched between the usual banal topics of gay marriage and Ferguson, is a U.S. threat to send ships and aircraft to the South China sea over the disputed islands. America claims that the dispute is about territorial rights in the sea itself and China says it’s about the islands themselves.

Do you, like me, get a feeling of a possible big catastrophe coming in the not too distant future?

An American response
China cautions U.S. Navy on patrols in South China Sea - CNNPolitics.com
‘Washington (CNN)—The U.S. is considering deploying aircraft and ships to contest Chinese claims to disputed islands in the South China Sea, U.S. officials said Wednesday.
Options are on the table to fly surveillance aircraft and sail Navy ships nearby in a move that puts the U.S. directly into a contentious territorial contest in East Asia, in which, until now, the U.S. has avoided overtly taking sides.’


China replies
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-25/war-will-be-inevitable-unless-us-stops-meddling-terrotorial-dispute-chinese-state-ne
'A war between the United States and China is “inevitable” unless Washington stops demanding Beijing halt its construction projects in the South China Sea, a Chinese state-owned newspaper warns.
“If the United States’ bottom line is that China has to halt its activities, then a US-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea,” The Global Times, an influential newspaper owned by the ruling Communist Party’s official newspaper the People’s Daily, said in an editorial Monday.'


Will America back down? Possibly the idea will be shelved, or it might end in a stalemate. America will sail through the South China seas as it’s entitled to do but keeping well away from the islands and stick it’s tongue out and China will boast it didn’t intervene because it didn’t come near the islands. Face saved on both sides and everyone goes home happy.
The alternative is that America does intrude on the islands in which case China will react. The loss of face, which are often grounds for suicide in Asia, will force them to do so.

An alternative view
http://rt.com/news/257841-russia-china-us-hegemony/
"The White House is determined to block the rise of the key nuclear-armed nations, Russia and China, neither of whom will join the "world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony," says head of the Institute for Political Economy, Paul Craig Roberts.
Dr Roberts believes that neither Russia, nor China will meanwhile accept the so-called "vassalage status accepted by the UK, Germany, France and the rest of Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia." According to the political analyst, the "price of world peace is the world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony."


I think what America increasingly has to accept is that there are two new kids on the block called Russia and China and both have threatened to use nuclear weapons. China is not in opposition to a U.S. military presence in places like Japan or South Korea, but like Putin with the Ukraine and now China with the islands dispute, both are increasingly drawing red lines of their own in their own backyards.
 
In my view, as long as America retains conventional weapons and non-nuclear superiority, it will always rule the seas and the airways. Just as Russia throughout the cold war often threatened nuclear war but never acted, China will as well. China sees, as many do, a weak President in Washington and is taking that opportunity to flex its muscles, as Russia has done in the Ukraine. Should America, with Japan and other allies, stand up to China in the South China seas, China will look for a way to save face and retreat.
 
Couldn't find anything on "nuclear".

Next please.
 
In my view, as long as America retains conventional weapons and non-nuclear superiority, it will always rule the seas and the airways. Just as Russia throughout the cold war often threatened nuclear war but never acted, China will as well. China sees, as many do, a weak President in Washington and is taking that opportunity to flex its muscles, as Russia has done in the Ukraine. Should America, with Japan and other allies, stand up to China in the South China seas, China will look for a way to save face and retreat.

I thought differently when first moving here a year ago to live and work. Now, I agree with you. I have learned that in the government and business sectors, the right hand really doesn't know at all what the left hand is doing, and when it does, it works diligently to make sure that the other doesn't hold the cards. I see this very much in the situation with the Spratley Island developments. What one department helped to create, so many others will have to defend to save face on an almost daily basis as the nations of the world see the US and others fly over unimpeded on an almost daily if not hourly basis. Not wanting to sermonize for hours on what I have learned living here, there is no better example of the ineptitude so prevalent in the Chinese government and its favored business sectors than the situation in the Spratley Islands.
 
I honestly really dislike the People's republic of China and most....not all... Ethnic Chinese people...

I've dated one, and she opened my eyes to the world of China, she was somewhat of an exception in some ways and not in others... and it's a messed up place, with messed up, rude, shovanistic, cowardly, superficial, and pretentious people.

This is my personal experience... and of course there are awesome chinese people and by no means is this related to Chinese descended Americans.... But I've had many chinese friends and socialized with many of them in college, and there is an overwhelming pattern I have seen with how their parents are... how their government is... how they view the world...and it disturbs me

And when I mean ethnic chinese, I mean chinese chinese... not the American socialized ones/ ones that hang out with people other than chinese
 
Last edited:
Sandwiched between the usual banal topics of gay marriage and Ferguson, is a U.S. threat to send ships and aircraft to the South China sea over the disputed islands. America claims that the dispute is about territorial rights in the sea itself and China says it’s about the islands themselves.

Do you, like me, get a feeling of a possible big catastrophe coming in the not too distant future?

An American response
China cautions U.S. Navy on patrols in South China Sea - CNNPolitics.com
‘Washington (CNN)—The U.S. is considering deploying aircraft and ships to contest Chinese claims to disputed islands in the South China Sea, U.S. officials said Wednesday.
Options are on the table to fly surveillance aircraft and sail Navy ships nearby in a move that puts the U.S. directly into a contentious territorial contest in East Asia, in which, until now, the U.S. has avoided overtly taking sides.’


China replies
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-25/war-will-be-inevitable-unless-us-stops-meddling-terrotorial-dispute-chinese-state-ne
'A war between the United States and China is “inevitable” unless Washington stops demanding Beijing halt its construction projects in the South China Sea, a Chinese state-owned newspaper warns.
“If the United States’ bottom line is that China has to halt its activities, then a US-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea,” The Global Times, an influential newspaper owned by the ruling Communist Party’s official newspaper the People’s Daily, said in an editorial Monday.'


Will America back down? Possibly the idea will be shelved, or it might end in a stalemate. America will sail through the South China seas as it’s entitled to do but keeping well away from the islands and stick it’s tongue out and China will boast it didn’t intervene because it didn’t come near the islands. Face saved on both sides and everyone goes home happy.
The alternative is that America does intrude on the islands in which case China will react. The loss of face, which are often grounds for suicide in Asia, will force them to do so.

An alternative view
http://rt.com/news/257841-russia-china-us-hegemony/
"The White House is determined to block the rise of the key nuclear-armed nations, Russia and China, neither of whom will join the "world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony," says head of the Institute for Political Economy, Paul Craig Roberts.
Dr Roberts believes that neither Russia, nor China will meanwhile accept the so-called "vassalage status accepted by the UK, Germany, France and the rest of Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia." According to the political analyst, the "price of world peace is the world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony."


I think what America increasingly has to accept is that there are two new kids on the block called Russia and China and both have threatened to use nuclear weapons. China is not in opposition to a U.S. military presence in places like Japan or South Korea, but like Putin with the Ukraine and now China with the islands dispute, both are increasingly drawing red lines of their own in their own backyards.
What on Earth makes you think Russia and China are "new kids" to nuclear weapons?
 
What on Earth makes you think Russia and China are "new kids" to nuclear weapons?

I didn’t say they were new kids to nuclear weapons, whatever made you say that?
 
Sandwiched between the usual banal topics of gay marriage and Ferguson, is a U.S. threat to send ships and aircraft to the South China sea over the disputed islands. America claims that the dispute is about territorial rights in the sea itself and China says it’s about the islands themselves.

Do you, like me, get a feeling of a possible big catastrophe coming in the not too distant future?

An American response
China cautions U.S. Navy on patrols in South China Sea - CNNPolitics.com
‘Washington (CNN)—The U.S. is considering deploying aircraft and ships to contest Chinese claims to disputed islands in the South China Sea, U.S. officials said Wednesday.
Options are on the table to fly surveillance aircraft and sail Navy ships nearby in a move that puts the U.S. directly into a contentious territorial contest in East Asia, in which, until now, the U.S. has avoided overtly taking sides.’


China replies
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-25/war-will-be-inevitable-unless-us-stops-meddling-terrotorial-dispute-chinese-state-ne
'A war between the United States and China is “inevitable” unless Washington stops demanding Beijing halt its construction projects in the South China Sea, a Chinese state-owned newspaper warns.
“If the United States’ bottom line is that China has to halt its activities, then a US-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea,” The Global Times, an influential newspaper owned by the ruling Communist Party’s official newspaper the People’s Daily, said in an editorial Monday.'


Will America back down? Possibly the idea will be shelved, or it might end in a stalemate. America will sail through the South China seas as it’s entitled to do but keeping well away from the islands and stick it’s tongue out and China will boast it didn’t intervene because it didn’t come near the islands. Face saved on both sides and everyone goes home happy.
The alternative is that America does intrude on the islands in which case China will react. The loss of face, which are often grounds for suicide in Asia, will force them to do so.

An alternative view
?'Nuclear war our likely future': Russia & China won't accept US hegemony, Reagan official warns ? RT News
"The White House is determined to block the rise of the key nuclear-armed nations, Russia and China, neither of whom will join the "world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony," says head of the Institute for Political Economy, Paul Craig Roberts.
Dr Roberts believes that neither Russia, nor China will meanwhile accept the so-called "vassalage status accepted by the UK, Germany, France and the rest of Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia." According to the political analyst, the "price of world peace is the world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony."


I think what America increasingly has to accept is that there are two new kids on the block called Russia and China and both have threatened to use nuclear weapons. China is not in opposition to a U.S. military presence in places like Japan or South Korea, but like Putin with the Ukraine and now China with the islands dispute, both are increasingly drawing red lines of their own in their own backyards.

So to the bolded. If anything other than that happens, then we've got very dangerous people all the way around steering events.
 
it's fairly unlikely that China is going to nuke one of its largest markets.
 
As I have been saying for some time now, China and Russia have vocalised their objections to a US dominated uni-polar world, citing global security concerns. They also have somewhat declared the need to push back on it. Dr. Roberts is no doubt right in pointing out that the White House seems determined to block the rise of these two key nuclear powers, while the two of them are not willing to join the worlds acceptance of Washington's hegemony.
 
I didn’t say they were new kids to nuclear weapons, whatever made you say that?
Russia and China are each older than the US, China by thousands of years, not new in any respect.
 
As I have been saying for some time now, China and Russia have vocalised their objections to a US dominated uni-polar world, citing global security concerns. They also have somewhat declared the need to push back on it. Dr. Roberts is no doubt right in pointing out that the White House seems determined to block the rise of these two key nuclear powers, while the two of them are not willing to join the worlds acceptance of Washington's hegemony.

I’ll go for that view too.

Perhaps it’s time for America to stop policing the world and become a little more isolationist and concentrate on its own internal security, in its own backyard?

I think that what isn’t fully understood in the west is that if sanctions hit Russia hard, their answer is to tighten their belts. In China’s case, a few cities incinerated and the loss of tens of millions wouldn’t be seen as losing. Several years ago I wondered why China was building ‘ghost cities’. Now I wonder if they know something we don’t.

The problem I think is that America has never seen real war on its own doorstep, the closest it got was 9/11 and that shocked it to the core. TV news of ‘shock and awe’ in Iraq were watched by millions sitting in a chair in the comfort of their own homes, oohing and aahing at the pretty lights and loud bangs – it was somewhere else. The U.S. is so technology advanced and reliant, that a couple of nuclear explosions on major cities and the chaos and anarchy that follows would pretty much send it back to the days of the Founding Fathers. Can you imagine the lights going out in Europe or America for more than a few hours? It’s having problems now keeping the lid on civil unrest.
No doubt someone will pop up and say no one would dare challenge the U.S. to which I’d reply; they already have.
 
Russia and China are each older than the US, China by thousands of years, not new in any respect.

I never mentioned them being older than the U.S. either.

What I said was: 'I think what America increasingly has to accept is that there are two new kids on the block called Russia and China and both have threatened to use nuclear weapons.'

The 'new kids on the block' refer to a new challenge and the 'both have threated to use nuclear weapons' is a threat to back up that challenge.
 
Last edited:
I’ll go for that view too.

Perhaps it’s time for America to stop policing the world and become a little more isolationist and concentrate on its own internal security, in its own backyard?

I think that what isn’t fully understood in the west is that if sanctions hit Russia hard, their answer is to tighten their belts. In China’s case, a few cities incinerated and the loss of tens of millions wouldn’t be seen as losing. Several years ago I wondered why China was building ‘ghost cities’. Now I wonder if they know something we don’t.

The problem I think is that America has never seen real war on its own doorstep, the closest it got was 9/11 and that shocked it to the core. TV news of ‘shock and awe’ in Iraq were watched by millions sitting in a chair in the comfort of their own homes, oohing and aahing at the pretty lights and loud bangs – it was somewhere else. The U.S. is so technology advanced and reliant, that a couple of nuclear explosions on major cities and the chaos and anarchy that follows would pretty much send it back to the days of the Founding Fathers. Can you imagine the lights going out in Europe or America for more than a few hours? It’s having problems now keeping the lid on civil unrest.
No doubt someone will pop up and say no one would dare challenge the U.S. to which I’d reply; they already have.

Well, that's what I'd like to see, a balance of power. It's not good for global security when there is a single superpower that can do essentially what it pleases, even if it's yours!!!
 
I never mentioned them being older than the U.S. either.

What I said was: 'I think what America increasingly has to accept is that there are two new kids on the block called Russia and China and both have threatened to use nuclear weapons.'

The 'new kids on the block' refer to a new challenge and the 'both have threated to use nuclear weapons' is a threat to back up that challenge.
They aren't a new challange, though. We've been dealing with them before we bought Alaska; it's why we bought Alaska. They've been threatening nukes since they'e had nukes, since before the Cold War.
 
I’ll go for that view too.

Perhaps it’s time for America to stop policing the world and become a little more isolationist and concentrate on its own internal security, in its own backyard?

I think that what isn’t fully understood in the west is that if sanctions hit Russia hard, their answer is to tighten their belts. In China’s case, a few cities incinerated and the loss of tens of millions wouldn’t be seen as losing. Several years ago I wondered why China was building ‘ghost cities’. Now I wonder if they know something we don’t.

The problem I think is that America has never seen real war on its own doorstep, the closest it got was 9/11 and that shocked it to the core. TV news of ‘shock and awe’ in Iraq were watched by millions sitting in a chair in the comfort of their own homes, oohing and aahing at the pretty lights and loud bangs – it was somewhere else. The U.S. is so technology advanced and reliant, that a couple of nuclear explosions on major cities and the chaos and anarchy that follows would pretty much send it back to the days of the Founding Fathers. Can you imagine the lights going out in Europe or America for more than a few hours? It’s having problems now keeping the lid on civil unrest.
No doubt someone will pop up and say no one would dare challenge the U.S. to which I’d reply; they already have.

From a fellow at the CFR that agrees with me, and perhaps yourself as well:

Our dominance is neither feasible nor desirable, and an adjustment towards a global equilibrium of burden-sharing among all capable powers is the most pressing geopolitical priority. I rarely use the words “leadership” and “primacy” as if to claim that America has any automatic right to it. In the past several years I have observed a growing tendency in China and even the relatively timid EU to think of themselves as “exceptional” in the same way we do—something that is not logically compatible with our so-called exceptionalism.

http://www.cfr.org/world/united-states-shifting-global-power-dynamics/p16002
 
Is it so hard now to maintain the superpower status?
 
From a fellow at the CFR that agrees with me, and perhaps yourself as well:

Our dominance is neither feasible nor desirable, and an adjustment towards a global equilibrium of burden-sharing among all capable powers is the most pressing geopolitical priority. I rarely use the words “leadership” and “primacy” as if to claim that America has any automatic right to it. In the past several years I have observed a growing tendency in China and even the relatively timid EU to think of themselves as “exceptional” in the same way we do—something that is not logically compatible with our so-called exceptionalism.

The United States and Shifting Global Power Dynamics - Council on Foreign Relations

I think the three of us agree. :)

The U.S. has to eventually learn to respect spheres of influence. The United States, the Russian Federation and China as a dominant power in the Asian region. It’s no longer possible to police the world with regime changes, Arab springs and invasions and the other two are now using the phrase ‘Don’t tread on me’ against the U.S. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-American and it’s done good things, but I think that the nationalistic view of ‘exceptionalism’ in an age of conflicting superpower interests is not going to end well.
 
They aren't a new challange, though. We've been dealing with them before we bought Alaska; it's why we bought Alaska. They've been threatening nukes since they'e had nukes, since before the Cold War.

When was the last time China threatened the U.S with a nuclear war?
When was the last time Russia threatened the U.S with nuclear war?
Since the Ukraine or the islands dispute, of course. That’s the new challenge.

The U.S. bought Alaska in 1867 and not to protect itself. Russia sold it fearing Britain would take it if they went to war. Originally the U.S. didn’t even want it, but eventually bought it at a knock down price.
 
When was the last time China threatened the U.S with a nuclear war?
When was the last time Russia threatened the U.S with nuclear war?
The last time was 2 years ago. Before that was 2011. Before that was 2005.

Russa and China have been threatening nuclear war since before 1964, and were in fact the reason for the No First Use treaty.
 
Last edited:
The last time was 2 years ago. Before that was 2011. Before that was 2005.

Russa and China have been threatening nuclear war since before 1964, and were in fact the reason for the No First Use treaty.


To the bolded lol, a little late don't ya think??
 
The last time was 2 years ago. Before that was 2011. Before that was 2005.

Russa and China have been threatening nuclear war since before 1964, and were in fact the reason for the No First Use treaty.

The dates of a threat to the U.S. from Russia or China in 2005 and 2011 I’m not aware of. Could you provide links please? Two years ago would have been leading up to the Ukraine crisis.
P.S. China only had its first nuclear test in 1964, it didn't even have a delivery system in those days.
 
Sandwiched between the usual banal topics of gay marriage and Ferguson, is a U.S. threat to send ships and aircraft to the South China sea over the disputed islands. America claims that the dispute is about territorial rights in the sea itself and China says it’s about the islands themselves.

Do you, like me, get a feeling of a possible big catastrophe coming in the not too distant future?

An American response
China cautions U.S. Navy on patrols in South China Sea - CNNPolitics.com
‘Washington (CNN)—The U.S. is considering deploying aircraft and ships to contest Chinese claims to disputed islands in the South China Sea, U.S. officials said Wednesday.
Options are on the table to fly surveillance aircraft and sail Navy ships nearby in a move that puts the U.S. directly into a contentious territorial contest in East Asia, in which, until now, the U.S. has avoided overtly taking sides.’


China replies
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-25/war-will-be-inevitable-unless-us-stops-meddling-terrotorial-dispute-chinese-state-ne
'A war between the United States and China is “inevitable” unless Washington stops demanding Beijing halt its construction projects in the South China Sea, a Chinese state-owned newspaper warns.
“If the United States’ bottom line is that China has to halt its activities, then a US-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea,” The Global Times, an influential newspaper owned by the ruling Communist Party’s official newspaper the People’s Daily, said in an editorial Monday.'


Will America back down? Possibly the idea will be shelved, or it might end in a stalemate. America will sail through the South China seas as it’s entitled to do but keeping well away from the islands and stick it’s tongue out and China will boast it didn’t intervene because it didn’t come near the islands. Face saved on both sides and everyone goes home happy.
The alternative is that America does intrude on the islands in which case China will react. The loss of face, which are often grounds for suicide in Asia, will force them to do so.

An alternative view
?'Nuclear war our likely future': Russia & China won't accept US hegemony, Reagan official warns ? RT News
"The White House is determined to block the rise of the key nuclear-armed nations, Russia and China, neither of whom will join the "world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony," says head of the Institute for Political Economy, Paul Craig Roberts.
Dr Roberts believes that neither Russia, nor China will meanwhile accept the so-called "vassalage status accepted by the UK, Germany, France and the rest of Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia." According to the political analyst, the "price of world peace is the world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony."


I think what America increasingly has to accept is that there are two new kids on the block called Russia and China and both have threatened to use nuclear weapons. China is not in opposition to a U.S. military presence in places like Japan or South Korea, but like Putin with the Ukraine and now China with the islands dispute, both are increasingly drawing red lines of their own in their own backyards.

It is going to be quite rough in the next years as relative power shifts more and more and a multi polar structure emerges. And it is going to be painful and will very probably end in nuclear war. What in this context might seem surprising is that such a global conflict need not be between the USA and Russia or China. It can easily develop out of skirmishes in the Himalaya or border controversies along the European southern rim. Coalitions and alliances will shift and change as the situation begins to resemble pre ww1 history. So at least the theory of non-cooperative games might let us expect.
 
The dates of a threat to the U.S. from Russia or China in 2005 and 2011 I’m not aware of. Could you provide links please?
I'm sure you're capable of using Google just as I did. Don't be lazy.

P.S. China only had its first nuclear test in 1964, it didn't even have a delivery system in those days.
And you think that's relevant to the discussion how?

***
China and Russia are not new players, this is not China's first threat of nuclear war to the US or of war in general. China has had designs on those islands for a very long time.
 
Last edited:
Is it so hard now to maintain the superpower status?

As the economic prowess grows nations can spend more on military. This is what we see happening.
 
Back
Top Bottom