Why is no one in this Forum paying attention to the threat from China?

There is no need to pay attention to china's military because china will never wage war. China is merchant minded country and will always avoid military conflicts. Their only interest is growing their economy and increasing the wealth of their one percent elite. China must have a strong military to counter americas military. Also, since china is number one in GDP they have to develop a powerful military that brings them the respect that they deserve. I believe their goal is the have the worlds most advanced military. They should since they are now the worlds biggest economy.

 

Lessons for the brainwashed and others:

China is a rogue state.

Rogue states are evil.

China is building an economic machine and a war machine.

Money and cheap goods for the lowquals trumps all.

 

This is EXACTLY what the Chinese Communist Party says! We should take them totally at their word! What could possibly go wrong??

 

Maybe you're right. But my point is, that their growing power is going to come at the direct expense of every nation in the region, including the U.S. as an "offshore balancer." Right now, at this moment, we still have the ability to tie down this giant, if we act in a concerted fashion with all the powers in the region (from Japan to India) in a programme of Containment.

In this seminal speech, foreign policy analyst John Mearshimer breaks down the reasons why China will become a belligerent in the region, that sooner or later the U.S. is going to have to face: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXov7MkgPB4


His basic point is that it is the interest of rising powers, to expand their influence to the greatest natural extent possible. China is changing, and the younger generation is going to be more ambitious and risk-taking in this regard, than previous generations. They are going to confront us, just as they are now attempting to bully their neighbors like Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines: http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/philippines-accuses-china-of-ramming-boats-in-south-china-sea/

If we don't contain them, they are going to push us back to Hawaii, and probably push us out of the Eastern hemisphere altogether (which amounts to the most strategically crucial part of the world's oceans): http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/is-china-moving-to-control-the-indian-ocean/

No matter how powerful a Dragon, China can be stopped by the coordinated efforts of all the nations of the region, especially the U.S., Japan, Australia, and India.

Unless we all want to be kissing their boots by the next generation, we've got to get to it.

 

Because they're no better off than we are. They're building empty cities just to try to keep their economy going.

 

Why would we want to compete in Africa? Because China is competing?

 

The U.S. thinks as long as there is trade, and the economy of China has much to lose, there will never be war.
However, all this trade (mostly one-sided) is only helping to fund China's military build-up.
Here's something to consider: how much will it cost the U.S. to counter this build-up? How much has the U.S. already spent? One begins to wonder whether all this trade is really such a good idea.

 

Africa is the last part of the globe with HUGE economic growth potential. China is trying to get in on the ground floor of the future boom. China can more easily navigate infrastructure projects and other business deals, because they don't have the scruples against negotiating with the kleptocratic & human-rights abusing gov'ts that prominently feature in Africa.

 

We missed our opportunity, when the Liberal (*)(*)(*)(*) Truman stopped the hero MacArthur from glassing the Hans.

 

I think the trade is fine; it's done much good in China, has brought them up closer to developed-world living standards. They need to have a decently productive economy moreover, in order to ever develop democratic political institutions. The CCP is operating on the bet that they can retain their monopoly on power, and at the same time enjoy the wealth created by market-oriented development. So FAR this gamble has paid off for them, but almost certainly it will not work indefinitely. Besides economic prosperity, the only excuse the CCP can use for dominating the country, is nationalism. And they are playing the nationalist card (depicting the Japanese as their enemy, for example) without reckoning how it could backfire on them.

To prepare for war against China, we will have to spend an enormous amount of money. If our military spending is now about 4% of GDP, it may have to go to 6% or higher. To do this, we would absolutely have to put high taxes on the rich.

But the real way to deal with China, is to careful ring China with a band of allies that are in a lockstep anti-Chinese alliance. This is one of China's greatest fears, and it's something they routinely accuse the U.S. of doing. We need to make that fear a reality. By building a Pacific version of NATO, we can share the cost (and the risk) of militarily containing China.

 

A land war in Asia is madness, and that MacArthur was even contemplating it is evidence he had lost his mind. I'm not calling for an invasion of China; I'm talking about developing the naval strength (really a naval alliance, with us leading it) to keep them bottled up inside the first island-chain, and to prevent them from using their navy to threaten Japan, Taiwan, the countries of the SCS, etc., or pushing us back to Hawaii and replacing us as the world's maritime hegemon.

 

Why is the U.S. trading with China when they will only have to go turn around and spend any economic benefit on increased military spending to counter China? China is benefitting from the arrangement far more than the U.S.

 

It's not like China and the U.S. are single actors, deciding in a black-or-white way to cooperate or compete. There are many, many businesses in America that make a lot of money in deals with China; and of course Wal-Mart Americans benefit from the low low prices of cheap Chinese imports. Furthermore, history shows that most of the time when there's even actual wars going on between two countries, there's still trade going on between them (though at a much lower level) because two people in each of the respective countries still see an opportunity for a good business deal, no matter what the larger country is doing.

The Chinese people are not our enemy; the CCP is. We're not ever going to effect regime change in China; that's for the Chinese people to do. But we have to contain the military ambitions of the Party.

 

Damn it people history is important to know.......... MacArthur called for Nuking the Hans. Not invading China.

 

Hope you're not serious about this. The Chinese people are OK and do not deserve to be nuked. I'm not sure what you think nuking them would actually accomplish (besides committing a war crime). If we did that China would eventually give us payback, guaranteed. We need people who are sober, contributing to this thread.

 

Jesus christ, how about some reading comprehension? I did not advocate nuking them now, I am advocating that we should have nuked them during the Korean war.

 

Yes, I understood you. Everything I said still applies. I don't have any real complaint with what our China policy has been, up until recently. HRC when Sec of State gave the Chinese a real shot across the bow over their aggressive moves in the South China Sea (the Chinese don't like her - they have a seriously sexist culture and are intimidated by and resent strong women), but in general Obama's posture there has been listless, and Kerry has had the same stupid fixation with the ME that the lemming-media does.

Like I said in the OP, there are many separate potential flashpoints in our relationship with China that could spark a serious crisis, a REAL crisis - not this penny-ante stuff going on in Ukraine with Russia. Our basic strategic position in world geopolitics is at stake; We've got to get on the ball.

 

The title of this thread is absolutely misleading. The USA is more of a threat to China, than China to the USA. The U.S foreign policy makers have kept an eye on China for a long time. The U.S. pivot to Asia, the military movement, hardware, soldiers etc...etc...Who are you kidding here?

String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China's Rising Power Across the Asian Littoral

Authored by Lieutenant Colonel Christopher J Pehrson.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubid=721

Furthermore, the U.S. military moves directed against China.

US is Encircling China with Fighter Jets and Stealth Bombers

Plus, Washington is still considering selling submarines to Taiwan. Tuesday defense links


http://thediplomat.com/2013/07/us-is-encircling-china-with-fighter-jets-and-stealth-bombers/

 

Well, whatever. The CCP leadership has interests that directly oppose ours: whether it's preventing democracy in NK, claiming sovereignty over other countries' territory (Taiwan, India, Japan, Vietnam, etc.), claiming sovereignty over international airspace and waters (ADIZs over Japanese territory, territorial claim of the whole of the SCS), or building a navy which has the express purpose of expelling the U.S. naval presence from the Western Pacific. So our refusal to accept their depredations is a "threat" to them, sure. Soon the whole of East Asia will be under their boot, unless we resist them.

 

It's territorial disputes so both party has claim except tawian which is in state of civil war with China. As for influence what would u think if China has military in Mexico Cuba and naval base surrounded US mainland. Cause that's exac what happens right now in China. We basically surrounded entire China with our military
If we push them too hard it will start a war. It's a balance game

 

Is it pushing when one simply responds to another's moves?

 

To view the relationship of Taiwan with China as a "civil war" is to take the CCP line on their dispute - namely, that the Taiwanese are rebels and have no ultimately legitimate claim to their own state. Not only does that badly mischaracterize that actual status of Taiwan, but it also constitutes the abandonment by the West of a people and a state the has struggled hard for democracy.

Of course with Taiwan, the disputed islands, and the South China Sea, we are talking about "territorial disputes." But it should be obvious, that just because there is a "dispute," does not mean that we have to suspend all judgment about who is making the more legitimate claim. Especially when a country like China is initiating aggressive moves and throwing hard power into the equation. You have to look at the context - China has border disputes with nearly all of its neighbors. It sends troops into territory claimed by India (in 2014), and imposes (to put it diplomatically) on the territory of Vietnam, the Philippines, and Japan.

It is simply foolish to give a moral equivalence between the claims and interests of China, and the claims and interests of all the other concerned powers of the region.

This is well meaning, but deluded. What we are talking about is a classic Thucydidean contest: A Rising Power that is confronting an Established Power. China is not seeking "balance," in the region - China seeks to dominate there, the way we currently dominate. Our diplomatic-military hegemony in the Western Pacific has been benign, however - confined to keeping the peace, ensuring freedom of navigation, and providing aid in emergencies. If China occupies our position, they will use it to arm-twist their neighbors and rivals to do as they want; this fact is why the countries of the region want us to stick around.

There is no real "balance" that is possible, with China. Either they play by our rules, or we play by theirs. And "our" rules are really just the rules of the International System, a multi-lateral regime that we with our Allies have painstakingly built since the establishment of the United Nations after WWII. Now, the U.S. is the lynch-pin of this entire system; without our direct involvement, it would have unraveled (as the League of Nations did, prior to WWII). Since we are indispensable to the International System, we have the privilege to act as its Gendarme, and to intervene in other countries' affairs (on a selective basis).

This is basically the role China now wants, beginning with their own region. And it should tell you something, that every one of China's neighbors (except maybe North Korea) does not want this, and wants us to stick around.

So it's not "a balance game." We have to decide - who is going to be hegemon in the West Pacific, indeed on the world's oceans? Who is to be trusted with this role?

The U.S. Navy is not viewed the same way as our land forces. The most visible role we play in the West Pacific, is to send aid when there's a natural disaster, like the hurricane that struck the Philippines in 2013. What did China do, when the Philippines, their close neighbor, suffered from that typhoon? At first they did nothing; then under pressure they sent about 6 million renminbi in aid (a million dollars). Yup. China - huge economy, huge export surpluses, looks at the wrecked house of their neighbor, and tosses them nickel. That's the country that seeks to have maritime hegemony.

 

you need look at geography china has land border with 14 countries, only India has dispute with china on border dispute. with over 2 dozens southeast aisa country, china only has dispute with phillippine/vietnam, even malasia has good relationship with china now. yes taiwan(republic of china) is still at civil war with china, there were never cease fire agreement between those two (this is similar to N.korea/S.korea, eventually S.korea will unified North), to this day taiwan still claim mainland china as part of republic of china.
as for china aggressive move, both vietnam/phillippine harass chinese ships, and vice versa, just because the media concentrate on china, does not mean china is sole at fault, all the countries in ScS harassing each other, in the 70s vietnam invade one of largest island OWN by phillippine. dig deeper youll see there are plently incidents where vietnam/phillippine/japan harass chinese ships and vice versa, so no one can claim victims. vietnam claim of ScS overlap phillippine/malasia/burnei and vice versa, vietnam claim of ScS is 4 time the size of vietnam mainland. Now i'm not saying china is right but ALL these countries are doing the same to each other, its just media tend to concentrate on china.

china is not looking to occupy our position(they are more worry about economy and making $$$). NO one will be happy if surrounded by potential adversary force. there is balance, before WWI, UK was the dominant power and US was raising power, they establish a good relation with US, we never had war with each other in 20th century when US was a raising power. All i know is china is play for long game, they are not gonna push US if they are not ready till future, however, they will remember how we treat them NOW, it will be a self fulfilling prophecy. if someone has been bad to you when you were young, do you think you gonna be friends with that person when you grow?
we should play a neutral role in dispute between china/japan/phillippine, and make sure NO ONE use force, not point finger at china every time, sometime they are wrong, sometime they are not, keep as honest broker rather taking sides.

china total GDP is huge, per cap GDP is lower than brazil, about same as Iraq, and 1/5 of US, yes, they are still a developing country. They are #2 economy because the shear size. furthermore, during the hurricane 2013, china/philippine relation was at the LOWEST point, do you really expect them to aid a country who is in a very bad relationship at that time? put it this way, if there are natural disaster in Cuba/Iran, are we gonna give tens millions aid to those two.
china has alot issues(corruption, environment, low per cap GDP, human right etc), but before you criticize china, see if under same situation are you going do the same.