• 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 Warns War With U.S. Now "Practical Reality" Under Trump

There's no benefit from China declaring war on the US. No benefit from Russia doing it either.

Embargoes, tariffs, etc...maybe. Full-scale war? Please.

Chicken Little much?
 
Tomjas said:
And yet you still havent been able to defeat a few goat herders in Afghanistan

War against China :lamo
Click to expand...

That has less to do with might and more to do with not having the fortitude to do what is needed.
 
Tomjas said:
And yet you still havent been able to defeat a few goat herders in Afghanistan

War against China :lamo
Click to expand...


Against CCP Dictator-Tyrants in Beijing it is Air-Sea Battle. ASB became the official U.S. war fighting doctrine in 2010. It succeeded the Air-Land strategy and doctrine that was created during World War II until this century post-9/11.

No U.S. military will be setting foot on the mainland of PRC.

The times of Air-Land Battle are limited and restricted. The nature of military conflict with CCP China, should any conflict occur at any level, is AirSea, not land based. Some artificial islands and other natural islands in the South China Sea would be the closest one could come to land in a conflict with CCP-PRC. And in any conflict tiny islands along with islets would be gone in a flash.

Meet Air-Sea Battle (to include of course undersea).

So what is AirSea Battle?

A new concept for winning a war in the Pacific against a large, hostile peer competitor. In other words, a battle plan for beating China. Under Air Sea Battle, the United States would breach China’s defenses, surging ships, subs, planes and Marines into places Beijing doesn’t want the U.S. to go. Places like the South China, East China and Yellow Seas.

Although Beijing doesn’t appear to actually want a direct confrontation with the U.S., China grows increasingly assertive in a number of territorial disputes involving America’s friends and allies in the region. China is deploying weapons specifically designed to destroy America’s own weapons—ballistic missiles for hitting U.S. aircraft carriers, for instance. These weapons could create big no-go zones in the Pacific for the Pentagon. We call this “anti-access area denial [A2/AD].” Some Americans worry that if the U.S. doesn’t specifically counter these no-go zones, China might just decide it can do whatever it wants everywhere.



1323105498277873037.jpg



What’s so different about Air Sea Battle?

America has been fighting “small wars” in Iraq, Afghanistan, The Philippines, Somalia and Yemen for more than a decade. These occupations, counter-insurgency campaigns and counter-terrorism operations have mostly required ground troops, Special Operations Forces, tactical air power and drones. But that stuff doesn’t necessarily work in a big war against a high-tech foe. Air Sea Battle is supposed to shift our thinking, redirecting our attention from grinding ground wars and commando raids to complex, dangerous maneuvers in the air, sea, space and “cyber” realms—a.k.a., the Internet.

https://warisboring.com/in-which-we...navys-new-battle-plan-97b70e0314cb#.7giad3wan


Goat herders are irrelevant in the skies and in/under the seas of the western Pacific, East China Sea, South South China Sea, Indian Ocean. So are ground forces of the Army which has had a humbling run at it since Vietnam to the present. Now it is the USAF, USN, USMC with the Army in support, primarily artillery (various missiles offensive and defensive).
 
Last edited:
Helix said:
war between our two countries would be utterly catastrophic, and should be avoided at all costs. a trade war would exceptionally undesirable, but survivable. neither side would benefit, however, and consumers would fund it.
Click to expand...


War is always catastrophic as everyone knows.

CCP Dynasty in Beijing will not have or allow a war to develop. Aside from an unlikely Guns of August scenario neither side is liable to start shooting. If some shooting conflict might occur, it would be an incident here or perhaps an incident there, not a major blowup. Neither side would allow a major blowup.

For the obvious reasons.

Further, CCP Dynasty of Dictators are like any other dictators. They get in your face you smack 'em upside the head the way Trump is doing with his expert and savvy CCP advisers. Trump has Xi Jinping thanking him profusely for maintaining the "One China" policy which would anyway never be broken in peacetime. CCP Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Australia last week suddenly said Oz does not need to choose between the USA or China, which is an earthquake reversal of the CCP demands of the past ten years that Oz capitulate to its huge neighbor to the north. (Last year at the urging of Potus Obama Oz froze China investments in Australia power grids, land purchases and buying up major agricultural corporations...game over for CCP in Oz.)

CCP Boyz are reigning it in, not tossing it out as they had been. Trump and his strongly anti-CCP advisers have reversed the situation of the past two decades. Washington has with a bolt of lightning seized the initiative (a major point with Sun Tzu). CCP had had the initiative and had been calling the shots, but now and suddenly the Boyz have been knocked on their back foot and off balance. Their major focus presently is to get about trying to steady themselves back up again. Washington is now calling the shots and the Boyz are reacting, scrambling, off stride, confused and on edge. In other words, the Boyz have Trump and USA right where we want them.

This marks the definitive point at which the Chinese Century has ended before it ever began. Real peace in our time is coming at us in fact and in reality, because it derives from strength, realism, toughness and because U.S. is now pursuing it with its eyes open.
 
Last edited:
sanman said:
The OP is a buffoon. Left want to keep bellowing for war against Russia, but on China they're in full appeasement mode. At least there are lots of Russians living in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine - a majority in both areas, in fact. But meanwhile there are no Chinese living historically on those islands that China's built and now using to claim vaste swathes of ocean territory for itself.

Sorry, but Russia has a lot more in common with the West than China does - and I say that as someone of Asian origin.

If the US can face off against Russia, then why should it cower in front of China?
Click to expand...

China are still Commies.
 
Tomjas said:
And yet you still havent been able to defeat a few goat herders in Afghanistan

War against China :lamo
Click to expand...

You obviously are not an avid reader of history. The Boers (farmers in South Africa) kicked the **** out of the British, but the British went on to slog there way to victory in 2 world wars against much larger armies. Same principle. The British were not willing to kill every man woman and child in South Africa to beat the Boers, and there was no real incentive to do so. Even if the Boers were a problem.

Do you honestly believe a shooting war between the US and China would even remotely resemble a "war" between the US (that was focused on occupation as the enemy hid amongst women and children and caves)? Let's just erase the nuclear deterrence factor, and the economics...the United States had a VASTLY superior navy. We could park off their coast with 7 or 8 carrier groups, then you factor in our long range bombers, medium and short range fighters from neighboring nations, Japan, Korea, cruise missile, subs, etc ad naseum. Then you also have to consider how many people in China would be happier living under a non communist regime.

The war would be a major shooting war. And it wouldn't be us fighting people in caves. It would be surgical targeted strikes on a mostly land based military that's navy would be decimated in short order. The Chinese navy wouldn't last long enough to defend its own coast. Let alone press any sort of attack. We would be bringing the fight to them. And that is a major advantage and deterrent.

But nuclear power politics had changed the game so all of that is irrelevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tangmo said:
War is always catastrophic as everyone knows.

CCP Dynasty in Beijing will not have or allow a war to develop. Aside from an unlikely Guns of August scenario neither side is liable to start shooting. If some shooting conflict might occur, it would be an incident here or perhaps an incident there, not a major blowup. Neither side would allow a major blowup.

For the obvious reasons.

Further, CCP Dynasty of Dictators are like any other dictators. They get in your face you smack 'em upside the head the way Trump is doing with his expert and savvy CCP advisers. Trump has Xi Jinping thanking him profusely for maintaining the "One China" policy which would anyway never be broken in peacetime. CCP Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Australia last week suddenly said Oz does not need to choose between the USA or China, which is an earthquake reversal of the CCP demands of the past ten years that Oz capitulate to its huge neighbor to the north. (Last year at the urging of Potus Obama Oz froze China investments in Australia power grids, land purchases and buying up major agricultural corporations...game over for CCP in Oz.)

CCP Boyz are reigning it in, not tossing it out as they had been. Trump and his strongly anti-CCP advisers have reversed the situation of the past two decades. Washington has with a bolt of lightning seized the initiative (a major point with Sun Tzu). CCP had had the initiative and had been calling the shots, but now and suddenly the Boyz have been knocked on their back foot and off balance. Their major focus presently is to get about trying to steady themselves back up again. Washington is now calling the shots and the Boyz are reacting, scrambling, off stride, confused and on edge. In other words, the Boyz have Trump and USA right where we want them.

This marks the definitive point at which the Chinese Century has ended before it ever began. Real peace in our time is coming at us in fact and in reality, because it derives from strength, realism, toughness and because U.S. is now pursuing it with its eyes open.
Click to expand...

please. the multi-decade US / China dynamic hasn't been turned on its head by three weeks of an adolescent blowhard talking on a phone and posting trash talk on Twitter. Chinese leadership isn't about to say "well, heck durn it. i guess they've got our number. we'd better do as he says." what they are more likely to do is exploit this guy's narcissism and brash, "go with my gut" style to their own advantage. ****, they could probably get him to run headlong into quicksand with a simple insult or a compliment.

and, again, back to The Art of War :

20. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.

21. If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him.

22. If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
Click to expand...
 
blackjack50 said:
You obviously are not an avid reader of history. The Boers (farmers in South Africa) kicked the **** out of the British, but the British went on to slog there way to victory in 2 world wars against much larger armies. Same principle. The British were not willing to kill every man woman and child in South Africa to beat the Boers, and there was no real incentive to do so. Even if the Boers were a problem.

Do you honestly believe a shooting war between the US and China would even remotely resemble a "war" between the US (that was focused on occupation as the enemy hid amongst women and children and caves)? Let's just erase the nuclear deterrence factor, and the economics...the United States had a VASTLY superior navy. We could park off their coast with 7 or 8 carrier groups, then you factor in our long range bombers, medium and short range fighters from neighboring nations, Japan, Korea, cruise missile, subs, etc ad naseum. Then you also have to consider how many people in China would be happier living under a non communist regime.

The war would be a major shooting war. And it wouldn't be us fighting people in caves. It would be surgical targeted strikes on a mostly land based military that's navy would be decimated in short order. The Chinese navy wouldn't last long enough to defend its own coast. Let alone press any sort of attack. We would be bringing the fight to them. And that is a major advantage and deterrent.

But nuclear power politics had changed the game so all of that is irrelevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Much of what you say is true.

However, you need to factor in that:

a. China has the world's largest military;

b. One of the world's largest manufacturing bases with which to supply that military;

c. China has a population of more than a billion people;

d. There are more than 300 million Chinese expats who are unlikely to sit idly by whilst the motherland is being lit up;

e. The Chinese are ruthless when it comes to defending their sovereignty (e.g. they still massacre their own people so no prizes for guessing what there attitude would be to a foreign aggressor); and

e. The US would still need the support of allies in the region to conduct such an "exercise" and many, if not all, would tell them to jam it. Australia, for example, is one of the US' closest allies, currently home to several thousand marines and currently hosting some stealths (US to base stealth fighter jets in Australia in response to South China Sea tensions | The Independent) BUT has told Washington that it wants no part in military action againct China

Anyway, I hope that it's nothing more than the typical sabre rattling that has been going on for decades
 
Tomjas said:
Much of what you say is true.

However, you need to factor in that:

a. China has the world's largest military;
Click to expand...

Which is land based. With limited air cover. And poorly equipped. Canon fodder does not win wars.

b. One of the world's largest manufacturing bases with which to supply that military;
Click to expand...

Which would easily be decimated by superior air power. Especially given it is mainly coastal.

c. China has a population of more than a billion people;
Click to expand...

That would be a hindrance in a war fought on their turf. That means 1 billion people in the way, taking of resources, food, supplies, and potentially becoming refugees. Or turning on their own government for bringing war to their door step.



d.
There are more than 300 million Chinese expats who are unlikely to sit idly by whilst the motherland is being lit up;
Click to expand...

Which would be easy to track given their racial minority.

e.
The Chinese are ruthless when it comes to defending their sovereignty (e.g. they still massacre their own people so no prizes for guessing what there attitude would be to a foreign aggressor); and
Click to expand...

Ruthlessness rarely wins support.

e.
The US would still need the support of allies in the region to conduct such an "exercise" and many, if not all, would tell them to jam it. Australia, for example, is one of the US' closest allies, currently home to several thousand marines and currently hosting some stealths (US to base stealth fighter jets in Australia in response to South China Sea tensions | The Independent) BUT has told Washington that it wants no part in military action againct China
Click to expand...

Not to sound too egotistical...but our allies would do what we tell them too. Especially given the long-term consequences it would have to hurt a relationship with us.

Anyway, I hope that it's nothing more than the typical sabre rattling that has been going on for decades
Click to expand...

It is we are both nuclear powers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
Which is land based. With limited air cover. And poorly equipped. Canon fodder does not win wars.



Which would easily be decimated by superior air power. Especially given it is mainly coastal.



That would be a hindrance in a war fought on their turf. That means 1 billion people in the way, taking of resources, food, supplies, and potentially becoming refugees. Or turning on their own government for bringing war to their door step.



d.

Which would be easy to track given their racial minority.

e.

Ruthlessness rarely wins support.

e.

Not to sound too egotistical...but our allies would do what we tell them too. Especially given the long-term consequences it would have to hurt a relationship with us.



It is we are both nuclear powers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Grounded: Nearly two-thirds of US Navy?s strike fighters can?t fly

Doesnt look like the US is ready for it anyway

BTW, I think that you underestimate the amount of political capital that Washington has spent this century and whilst Dubya was regarded in Australia as a nutter, Trump is held in even lower esteem (if that's even possible)
 
Helix said:
please. the multi-decade US / China dynamic hasn't been turned on its head by three weeks of an adolescent blowhard talking on a phone and posting trash talk on Twitter. Chinese leadership isn't about to say "well, heck durn it. i guess they've got our number. we'd better do as he says." what they are more likely to do is exploit this guy's narcissism and brash, "go with my gut" style to their own advantage. ****, they could probably get him to run headlong into quicksand with a simple insult or a compliment.

and, again, back to The Art of War :
Click to expand...


Sun Wu's birthname state of Wu after which the General Sun Tzu got his honorific 'Master Sun' lost out during the Warring States period of Chinese history to the warlord Qin Shi Huang.

Pronounce the name of General Qin as Chin, which by the last dynasty of Pu Yi that ended in 1910 had become the Mongul conquerors Qin Dynasty, pronounced Chin. As in China.

The country is Qin, i.e., Chin as in China. It is not Sun or Sunnia or Sunland.

China.

Sun Tzu lost the Warring States battles and series of wars among seven states. China is named in English after the winner of the Warring States period, General Qin Shi Huang. General Chin. From which the West got the name of China.

China.

If Sun Tzu met Donald Trump Master Sun would get run out too, same as happened to Sun Tzu by the first wild and radically nuts warlord cum first emperor of China, General Qin. That's Emperor Chin to us. As in the first emperor of the place then and newly known as China.

The Chinese have a grimly miserable history as warriors Sun Tzu notwithstanding. Chinese warlords fight Chinese warlords all of whom only throw their hands in the air in the face of a foreign invader (1937-45 most recently). Mao Zedong fought Chiang Kai Shek and each took turns fighting the Japanese occupiers during WWII but neither had any success. Potus Roosevelt chose the island hopping campaign of Gen. MacArthur over the invasion of China then Japan strategy proposed by Pacific Commander Admiral Nimitz because China was a flat out mess. A total mess.
 
Last edited:
Tomjas said:
Grounded: Nearly two-thirds of US Navy?s strike fighters can?t fly

Doesnt look like the US is ready for it anyway

BTW, I think that you underestimate the amount of political capital that Washington has spent this century and whilst Dubya was regarded in Australia as a nutter, Trump is held in even lower esteem (if that's even possible)
Click to expand...

The US was woefully unprepared to respond to communist aggression 1n Korea in 1950 also

The result is always the needless death of good Americans when when America has to fight
 
Helix said:
they did, indeed.

some relevant passages :



These relate to interventionism in the Middle East :



The Internet Classics Archive | The Art of War by Sun Tzu
Click to expand...



Sun Tzu won his battles and lost his wars.

Neither is this is 200 years ago when the West considered the Chinese to be "inscrutable."

Nor is it a hundred years ago with the same Western mindset. And it's not 50 years ago and Red China.

We have interacted with the Chinese inside and outside of China for the past 50 years to include the past 30 years especially. Through myriad communications and interaction we know the people, the culture, Chinese society, values, behaviors -- Chinese civilization. There's no mystery to them or it. It's not a magical kingdom of superior people who are the smartest and most clever people on the planet. No such smarter or most clever people exist at all.

They put their pants on one leg at a time y'know.

The West makes a better use of Sun Tzu and his widely hailed manuscript than the Chinese themselves ever did...or would.
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
Yeah, but for China, why "punch back" when Trump's trade policies are akin to the U.S. punching itself in the face over and over again?
Click to expand...

Our backing out of the TPP Is a tragedy, though that's probably a discussion for another thread. I second the motion that war between the US and China is moronic. At most the two nations would engage in some proxy war, nothing more nothing less.
 
Tangmo said:
Sun Tzu won his battles and lost his wars.

Neither is this is 200 years ago when the West considered the Chinese to be "inscrutable."

Nor is it a hundred years ago with the same Western mindset. And it's not 50 years ago and Red China.

We have interacted with the Chinese inside and outside of China for the past 50 years to include the past 30 years especially. Through myriad communications and interaction we know the people, the culture, Chinese society, values, behaviors -- Chinese civilization. There's no mystery to them or it. It's not a magical kingdom of superior people who are the smartest and most clever people on the planet. No such smarter or most clever people exist at all.

They put their pants on one leg at a time y'know.

The West makes a better use of Sun Tzu and his widely hailed manuscript than the Chinese themselves ever did...or would.
Click to expand...

again, arrogance and shortsightedness can be exploited fairly effectively.
 
Helix said:
again, arrogance and shortsightedness can be exploited fairly effectively.
Click to expand...


Sun Tzu lost his wars during his time of the Warring States period 403 B.C. to 231 B.C. when the warlords of seven states fought to control the place. General Qin (pron Chin) won, hence the name in English of China (Chine in French). In Chinese, Zhong Gwo, i.e., Central Kingdom aka Middle Kingdom.

Anyone back then backing General Sun Tzu and his state of Wu was backing the wrong horse.

CCP Dynasty in Beijing apply a number of Sun Tzu principles in their present military strategies and doctrines. Given Sun Tzu focused on gaining the psychological advantage over any opponent, you are locked into that aspect of it concerning Donald Trump. So are CCP focused on the psychological aspect of Sun Tzu, not his fighting strategies or tactics. CCP however never anticipated a Potus Trump nor are they prepared for him. Neither did Sun Tzu have to face off against the United States.

All the same, Sun Tzu and his side, one of the six loser states, were defeated by the guy who became the first emperor, the radical wildman General Qin (Chin) who as the newly unified country's first emperor ended up insane. It is uniquely Chinese.

I simply emphasize that Trump and his savvy CCP China advisors have taken the initiative from the CCP Boyz over Taiwan, the South China Sea, with more coming in trade, economics, currency among other major items. The Boyz themselves in their own inherent cultural arrogance are faring no better than Sun Tzu did. That's all.
 
Last edited:
Tangmo said:
Sun Tzu lost his wars during his time of the Warring States period 403 B.C. to 231 B.C. when the warlords of seven states fought to control the place. General Qin (pron Chin) won, hence the name in English of China (Chine in French). In Chinese, Zhong Gwo, i.e., Central Kingdom aka Middle Kingdom.

Anyone back then backing General Sun Tzu and his state of Wu was backing the wrong horse.

CCP Dynasty in Beijing apply a number of Sun Tzu principles in their present military strategies and doctrines. Given Sun Tzu focused on gaining the psychological advantage over any opponent, you are locked into that aspect of it concerning Donald Trump. So are CCP focused on the psychological aspect of Sun Tzu, not his fighting strategies or tactics. CCP however never anticipated a Potus Trump.

All the same, Sun Tzu and his side, one of the six loser states, were defeated by the guy who became the first emperor, the radical wildman General Qin (Chin) who as the country's first emperor ended up insane.

I simply emphasize that Trump and his savvy CCP China advisors have taken the initiative from the CCP Boyz over Taiwan, the South China Sea, with more coming in trade, economics, currency among other major items. The Boyz themselves in their own inherent cultural arrogance are faring no better than Sun Tzu did. That's all.
Click to expand...

we're repeating ourselves at this point. i suppose we'll see how it plays out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom