Do you Think We Should Start A War with China?

Post Reply New Topic

haha, how did i not see THAT logic-pitfall???

i like this thread :]

Those are good questions and asking them will help clarify my position.

I don't think we could fight a war like that within China. It would cost too many lives. The Chinese government would have to a fall like with the USSR. China would have to have an increased level civil disobedience, like it did in the 1980 and 1990s. Chinese economy would have collapse, like it is now starting too. The role of the USA would have to be largely within the confines of the UN and as a peace keeping entity primarily protecting innocent civilians from being rolled over and slaughtered by the Chinese Army. The UN and USA would have to have the support of resistance groups inside China. The UN and USA would have the super majority support of the world. And nuclear weapons would have to be, for the most part, off the table. And by that I mean that if nuclear weapons would work as long term tactic, it couldn't happen. But for the most part, nuclear weapons are good for much other than killing lots of people for no good reason. I don't think there is a government in the world that would use it. As the person that ordered use of one, and his followers would be killed like Nazis for using such a weapon against innocent people.

If you are asking me, would I risk my life for the good of the USA or my personal freedom or the freedom of my family? Yes. Would I sacrifice my life for the good of China? Probably not. I think there are a lot of people in China that would fight for their freedoms though, but are not in a position to do so.

You know, China has the worst Human Rights record of any major nation on the planet. What it does to woman and children is unconscionable. Anyone that treated their workers, woman, and children in a Western society would get life in prison. If someone locked your 5 year old in a closet 6 hours a day and forced him to work the remaining 18, would you want to fight for that child, or do you think it is morally acceptable to not take action to stop it?

Hal,

No sane government would launch a nuclear weapon. It serves no tactile advantage, whatsoever in a war. It is only good for blowing up civilians and would not change the outcome of a war other than it might just piss people off at targeting and killing innocent civilians that have no say in the war. And using nuclear weapons to sink a submarine seems a bit like overkill.

Anyone that has any participation with a nuclear weapons launch would be killed, as well as their families, everyone in their home town, in retaliation. Nobody, no sane group of people would do that.

Nuclear weapons are good for only one thing and one thing only, that is to kill innocent people wholesale. The removal of a bad government in China is not the same thing as killing everyone in the country, and the people with their finger on the button know that or at least a number of them do. The current regime of China would capitulate if the world turned against them and they lost control and power, and even if they refused to do so, their subordinates would force them, not slaughter billions along with their families and themselves in retaliation.

*snort*

what a teenage male view of warfare.
War isn't about status, you fool. War is about survival. If the only way you can survive is by completely annihilating your enemy, then you will do so.



I didn't get the impression that the torpedoes referenced above were nuclear, just very effective - but, hey, whatever works to destroy the enemy.



Unless they knew either that they were going to die anyway, or that they would get enough of a jump on their enemy that they could wipe out the enemie's nuclear capability before a counter-attack could be launched. Besides, how sure are you that the people in control of China's nukes are sane?



The idea that regime change can be externally effected without incredible civilian casualties, or even, in most cases, internally without incredible civilian casualties, is belied by tens of thousands of years of history.



Yeah, just like the government of Burma did after the monks protested in the streets and then their country was wiped out by a cyclone.
Furthermore, if you think that international opinion would turn against China in this hypothetical war, what do you think would happen with international opinion regarding the U.S. getting involved in another nation-building invasion? Don't forget, the majority of the world already hates us for invading Iraq, notwithstanding the election of Obama; do you think that invading China would make us more popular?

the United States would not 'win' a war with China. They're better organized than us, they have more people than us, they have nuclear weapons, and they own our country's debt. Furthermore, they designed and produced a huge majority of our electronics.

by the way:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/16079/na ... china.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/29/news/cyber.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01954.html

Have you heard of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Might I inform you that in the last paragraph you are referring to strategic theater nuclear weapons such as Nuclear-Tipped Ballistic missiles but you fail to understand that in fact, Nuclear Arms can be used as [b]tactical weapons.
For example, one of the reasons why there has never been an orchestrated Arab military attack on Israel is because Israel has tactical(and some strategic)nuclear weapons! The Chinese DO have tactical nuclear weapons, particularly the Chinese Navy's standoff SUNBURN cruise missiles designed to wipe out an entire naval *battle group*. Using such weapons out at sea would result in minimal fallout since it would mostly vaporize sea water. NATO tactical nuclear weapons were placed in cold war Europe to create a disincentive for the Soviets to launch a ground invasion of West Germany.

Yes, but Japan could not return the favor, could they.

Yeah, just like the government of Burma did after the monks protested in the streets and then their country was wiped out by a cyclone.
Furthermore, if you think that international opinion would turn against China in this hypothetical war, what do you think would happen with international opinion regarding the U.S. getting involved in another nation-building invasion? Don't forget, the majority of the world already hates us for invading Iraq, notwithstanding the election of Obama; do you think that invading China would make us more popular?

Well, if people cannot tell the difference between helping to free people from a tyrannical government versus exploiting a poor population for its limited by valuable resources, I guess I wouldn't care what the world thought. I don't think you can compare China with Burma. There is no resolve on the bahalf of the US to do anything about Burma.
I also think you need a history lesson if you are unaware that most regime changes happen without an all out massive war. In fact, most nations have had multipule limited or bloodless coups and regime changes. The US has had 44 regime changes and only two of them were bloody, the Revolutionary War, and the Civil War.

the United States would not 'win' a war with China. They're better organized than us, they have more people than us, they have nuclear weapons, and they own our country's debt. Furthermore, they designed and produced a huge majority of our electronics.

Well, I am willing to bet in a civil war, one side would win. And with the help of the US and UN, it would be our side. The debt doesn't mean anything. As obviously we don't pay debts to nations we are at war with. Do you honestly think German and US honored each others debts in WWI and WWII? Or France and Britain when at war with the other. Wise up please. Them debt papers would be as worthless as the paper they are printed on. And the trade deficit would disappear as we would have to produce our own equipment.

Thanks for the articles. They were interesting reading.

Hal,

If you hate the US so much. Why would not be in favor of us going to war with China, which in your opinion would launch her nuclear arsenal at the US and destroy us?

And the Chinese Navy is no match for the US Navy. Chinese resources would be in China if it were in a Civil War, not sinking battleships in Hawaii.

IA, you need to work on your "quote" editing. Rather than re-inclose everything properly for you, I will simply snip everything but your additions.

The survival of a state is not equal to the survival and prosperity of a population, and tactical victory does not mean that the victor emerges from the war in better shape than it went in to the war. What does 'winning' mean to you, out of curiosity? Do you think that the Vietnamese 'won' their conflict with the U.S.? Do you think that the U.S. 'won' its conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan? Do you think that the U.S. 'won' the cold war? Do you think that Russia 'won' its conflict with the Nazis?


*snort*

And you can predict this ...how, exactly? You honestly think that you can predict the outcome of a full-out war in any country, much less China?



BS. If your enemy has been completely annihilated, you have 'won.' Right? No one left to figh, last country extant is the victor?



*snort*
You've just spent pages trying to convince us that the ruling regime in china are all Psychopaths; why wouldn't they put people like themselves in charge of their most powerful weapons? why would they treat their enemies any better than they treat their own people?



What, sort of like Iraq?
Sort of like Nicaragua? Like Chile?
Yeah, that's a successful model to follow...



Ok, first: why would China's government react any differently than you just did?
Secondly, do you honestly think that the U.S. invaded Iraq out of the goodness of our collective hearts?



I guess this would be *after* we shifted back from producing tanks and bombs instead?

The fact that Japan had no nuclear weapons to retaliate does not alter the point that a 'sane' government did, in fact, launch nuclear strikes against civilian populations.

Nor is the fact that Japan had no nukes relevant in the context of the current argument, given that China (unlike the Japan of WWII) has an extensive nuclear arsenal.

Yes it does.. .
Because if Japan had nuclear weapons to retaliate the US would not have dropped them out of knowledge that Japan would in turn drop them on us.

The insanity isn't in dropping them, but in knowing that the same will happen to you in return.

Is is called MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. Drop one nuke, you get nuked. That is what the Cold War was all about. When we dropped on Japan they couldn't retaliate. So we could drop all we wanted until they surrendered.

admit it. you want a war w china, simply cus you find the idea to be awesome and epic.

USA VS CHINA

"who's with me!"

you got your answer tho,
did you know, by the way, that china and india had a war?
go read up on it, its very interesting!

Not a Nuclear War, no. But I think removing the current Chinese Government would solve a lot of problems for China, the world and the USA. I do think if China doesn't become a democracy it will become a threat to the world. I really do dislike the Chinese government and how they treat neighboring countries like Tibet and Taiwan.

I think you just hate the US because of Bush's mistreatment of our military. I really don't think you like the Chinese government or think they are a fair or just government.

tibet isnt considered a country by any nation in the world.
zero, zip.
its you against the world on that subject.

taiwan is chinese internal affairs, as taiwan officially claims the entire chinese mainland (they just recently pulled their claim for mongolia)

again, prepare yourself on the subject matter, before taking it online :b

I think I am better prepared than someone that cannot even use proper grammar. Did you even watch the Olympics with all the protests? So, no, I am not alone on that one. Every liberal outfit in the USA has a "Free Tibet" sticker, and Taiwan doesn't like to consider itself under Chinese rule. It even launched missiles at Taiwan. China can claim the Moon, but that doesn't make it a part of China, nor give it the right to mistreat those that land on it.