Asia Is a US-China war about to break out?

[Linda_Lovelace]

he kicked off the current war with china. make no mistake, we are at war with them (just without the bullets so far)

I doubt there will be one. They had to be reigned in and their trade practices were very manipulative. Anyway, not this thread, but I hate war.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I doubt there will be one. They had to be reigned in and their trade practices were very manipulative. Anyway, not this thread, but I hate war.

both sides are engaged in spying and cyber attacks on each other. if thats peace, you can have it

 

[JoondalupJ]

I've personally always considered a US-China war a mere theoretical possibility, on the never-never, probably won't happen. Then today I read Stan Grant's article.

If China attacks Taiwan, it could spell war

Xi Jinping may gamble that America would not spill any blood for Taiwan. Stan Grant asks: What happens next?

abc.net.au

Actually made me **** myself a bit, much morseo than covid-19 because I'm grateful to have my health. If the United States and China start a war then Australia is in for a world of pain - especially us blokes who are of military age.

I'm not sure that war would be fought with numbers of soldiers, I am not sure there will be a war with these two nations, because the main reason to ask would be WHY?
If it escalated into nuclear and or more countries getting involved the worse case is annihilation of most people.

And the world in ruin, there is no winning in a nuclear conflict of that size because your power as an economic giant will mean nothing with most of your customers dead! And your infrastructure mostly destroyed if you happened to be on the side with least damage and some of you survived it'd be very bad for you.

In that sort of case Russia and America would be able to wipe out the world ( so many war heads) and China with it.

Conventionally, I just don't see China with all its military build-up now, anywhere near the power of the United States, who is a warrior nation, they have virtually had to be that, after WW2 and their massive economic advancement.

They have done it all before on massive scale as well, that would have to be advantageous in a conventional war.

Also I believe they can put 9 or 11 carrier battle groups into action, and although the Chinese may have a missile system that endangers America's carrier groups, you would think that the USA is well prepared for that.
And probably even exceeded that technology to protect itself and its fleets.

I don't believe the Americans would be sitting on their hands over the years while they watch China.

Also additional enemies for China, I'm sure some SE Asian nations would not stand with China's CCP, I would imagine some Europeans like UK, Germany even, France would have very strong interests in protecting their own interests from China.
I would also not put Russia as a Guaranteed?? Ally. If I was China.
Who would know what this West bent nation I mean, I think the average Russian would like to live in a western society lifestyle and not become an ally and locked into the downsides of Chinese domination. if they happened to win both military and economic? Again what do they really win nothing. I think China would develop another enemy?

You really have no idea what Russia might do, mainly they are European?

So for me a serious large international conflict even if it stayed conventional I think China would be taken apart, not by the USA alone but perhaps inside its own borders and its own people, Chinese are not necessarily the CCP if you get my drift.

Look at Jimmy Lai and others from Hong Kong persecuted by theCCP governing.

As for Taiwan, if China is so bloody-minded that they would attack Taiwan no matter what. I think that the USA may just stand and watch, I don't know of course, but if the scenario above played out, why would they get involved with the chance of a nuclear conflict.
My thinking is that China and Taiwan can settle their differences without having to fight over it.
China would probably win the battle, but it would get an arm and a leg torn off it would not be easy.
in that kind of solution.
So I hope they are all smart enough to do it talking, no other way.
Remember India has nukes, Pakistan has nukes, Israel has nukes, China would face an array of enemies.

So a good outcome from escalation to full Nuclear war would be impossible to happen.

No one wins.
I think we're smarter, better throwing a few verbal stones than loaded and locked.

 

[Rotayjay]

I'm not sure that war would be fought with numbers of soldiers, I am not sure there will be a war with these two nations, because the main reason to ask would be WHY?
If it escalated into nuclear and or more countries getting involved the worse case is annihilation of most people.

And the world in ruin, there is no winning in a nuclear conflict of that size because your power as an economic giant will mean nothing with most of your customers dead! And your infrastructure mostly destroyed if you happened to be on the side with least damage and some of you survived it'd be very bad for you.

In that sort of case Russia and America would be able to wipe out the world ( so many war heads) and China with it.

Conventionally, I just don't see China with all its military build-up now, anywhere near the power of the United States, who is a warrior nation, they have virtually had to be that, after WW2 and their massive economic advancement.

They have done it all before on massive scale as well, that would have to be advantageous in a conventional war.

Also I believe they can put 9 or 11 carrier battle groups into action, and although the Chinese may have a missile system that endangers America's carrier groups, you would think that the USA is well prepared for that.
And probably even exceeded that technology to protect itself and its fleets.

I don't believe the Americans would be sitting on their hands over the years while they watch China.

Also additional enemies for China, I'm sure some SE Asian nations would not stand with China's CCP, I would imagine some Europeans like UK, Germany even, France would have very strong interests in protecting their own interests from China.
I would also not put Russia as a Guaranteed?? Ally. If I was China.
Who would know what this West bent nation I mean, I think the average Russian would like to live in a western society lifestyle and not become an ally and locked into the downsides of Chinese domination. if they happened to win both military and economic? Again what do they really win nothing. I think China would develop another enemy?

You really have no idea what Russia might do, mainly they are European?

So for me a serious large international conflict even if it stayed conventional I think China would be taken apart, not by the USA alone but perhaps inside its own borders and its own people, Chinese are not necessarily the CCP if you get my drift.

Look at Jimmy Lai and others from Hong Kong persecuted by theCCP governing.

As for Taiwan, if China is so bloody-minded that they would attack Taiwan no matter what. I think that the USA may just stand and watch, I don't know of course, but if the scenario above played out, why would they get involved with the chance of a nuclear conflict.
My thinking is that China and Taiwan can settle their differences without having to fight over it.
China would probably win the battle, but it would get an arm and a leg torn off it would not be easy.
in that kind of solution.
So I hope they are all smart enough to do it talking, no other way.
Remember India has nukes, Pakistan has nukes, Israel has nukes, China would face an array of enemies.

So a good outcome from escalation to full Nuclear war would be impossible to happen.

No one wins.
I think we're smarter, better throwing a few verbal stones than loaded and locked.

I take it you've seen the 1984 movie 'Threads'. A conventional US-China war would be devastating, but a nuclear one (even with today's much smaller nuclear arsenals) would be unthinkable.

 

[JoondalupJ]

I take it you've seen the 1984 movie 'Threads'. A conventional US-China war would be devastating, but a nuclear one (even with today's much smaller nuclear arsenals) would be unthinkable.

Yes. Exactly.

 

[Rotayjay]

'We shouldn't kid ourselves': As China appears to be quietly building missile silos, experts have a warning

Analysts say satellite images of what appear to be 120 silos being built in China's desert could be part a broader strategy to confuse potential enemies and dissuade the world from intervening in Beijing's military actions.

mobile.abc.net.au

China now constructing nuclear missile silos, with some perhaps to be left empty so the US is prompted to target all of them.

This all lends weight to the preposition that if China invaded Taiwan, the United States would sit back, complain and let it happen. From a selfish perspective, I'd rather the Taiwanese fall under Beijing's tyranny than millions of people dying, possibly including me getting blown up at home by a thermonuclear warhead.

 

[Zidane98]

China needs consumerism to keep their factories ticking over. US needs products from China. This alone will prevent war breaking out. All we will ever see is public trading of barbs between both sides.

 

[Zidane98]

'We shouldn't kid ourselves': As China appears to be quietly building missile silos, experts have a warning

Analysts say satellite images of what appear to be 120 silos being built in China's desert could be part a broader strategy to confuse potential enemies and dissuade the world from intervening in Beijing's military actions.

mobile.abc.net.au

China now constructing nuclear missile silos, with some perhaps to be left empty so the US is prompted to target all of them.

This all lends weight to the preposition that if China invaded Taiwan, the United States would sit back, complain and let it happen. From a selfish perspective, I'd rather the Taiwanese fall under Beijing's tyranny than millions of people dying, possibly including me getting blown up at home by a thermonuclear warhead.

I see very little for China to gain by invading Taiwan but much to lose, they would have very few allies.

Would be surprised if the current situation changes.

 

[Rotayjay]

I see very little for China to gain by invading Taiwan but much to lose, they would have very few allies.

Would be surprised if the current situation changes.

You make a good point - if common sense prevails. Surely China would rather try to achieve the Tailwan annexation dream by politics rather than risking a costly war.

 

[Chief]

You make a good point - if common sense prevails. Surely China would rather try to achieve the Tailwan annexation dream by politics rather than risking a costly war.

They will just creep in. Slowly continue their strategy of making pretend islands, flying party members into “resorts” and generally occupying the hell out of the SC sea, choking it like a weed.

 

[Present Not Past]

‘Surrender’: China’s ‘crazy’ nuclear threat

“We will use nuclear bombs first. We will use nuclear bombs continuously. We will do this until Japan declares unconditional surrender for the second time,” a threatening video circulated among official Chinese Communist Party channels warns.

www.news.com.au

Is probably only empty threats however if China were to actually hit Japanese cities with nuclear weapons they would have to go after major US/Coalition ships as well otherwise they would have nuclear weapons inbound on Chinese cities within minutes.
The only ships that they couldn't effectively hit would be the US nuclear submarines and that would spell the deaths of 200M+ chinese.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

‘Surrender’: China’s ‘crazy’ nuclear threat

“We will use nuclear bombs first. We will use nuclear bombs continuously. We will do this until Japan declares unconditional surrender for the second time,” a threatening video circulated among official Chinese Communist Party channels warns.

www.news.com.au

Is probably only empty threats however if China were to actually hit Japanese cities with nuclear weapons they would have to go after major US/Coalition ships as well otherwise they would have nuclear weapons inbound on Chinese cities within minutes.
The only ships that they couldn't effectively hit would be the US nuclear submarines and that would spell the deaths of 200M+ chinese.

dont underestimate the hate that is still in china for japan, its genuinely surprising how bitter it still is (80 years after the invasion that is - the way some talk you'd think it was 8 years ago)

 

[Eagle Wrath]

I thought this was an interesting article.

“Every simulation that has been conducted looking at the threat from China by 2030 have all ended up with the defeat of the US,” CSIS’ China Power Project director Bonnie Glaser told The Times.

‘Sinister’ China challenge US can’t fight

The United States just lost a battle to save Taiwan from a Chinese invasion and it’s not the first time.

www.news.com.au

 

[Lethality]

This is why I think it's important to boycott Chinese products, as individuals if not as a country. Also because they're a genocidal dictatorship. Also because they're the largest emitters by far.

 

[Fire]

A rising aggressive China is of course a concern, but when running these war games the US military is hardly going to conclude "yeah we're good, we dont need more money."

 

[madmug]

dont underestimate the hate that is still in china for japan, its genuinely surprising how bitter it still is (80 years after the invasion that is - the way some talk you'd think it was 8 years ago)

Its understandable but pointless to carry on with it, except for domestic political consumption!. Russia does the same with national memories of Napoleon, WW1 & WW2, the Great Patriotic war.

Of course Japan well remembers the Mongol Hoards from across the sea, so they too have a national memory of facing such threats.

Now its the Red Peril, all over again!

 

[Schneebly11]

Its understandable but pointless to carry on with it, except for domestic political consumption!. Russia does the same with national memories of Napoleon, WW1 & WW2, the Great Patriotic war.

Jeez every country brings up battles fought ages ago to stir up the masses. Look at the controversy over the US Confederate flags, statutes of Confederate leaders and revisionism of the war that still exists 150 years after the Confederacy permanently ceased to exist.

In the UK there was constant mention of the WW2, the Battle of Britain, fighting the jerries, in the Brexit debate even when Germany is now the UK’s second largest trading partner.

And yes we here in Australia do it. Anzac Day and Gallipoli has been politicised over recent years, with a campaign to change a government in Turkey 105 years ago having zero effect on the lives of modern day Australians.

 

[VineySMASH]

‘Surrender’: China’s ‘crazy’ nuclear threat

“We will use nuclear bombs first. We will use nuclear bombs continuously. We will do this until Japan declares unconditional surrender for the second time,” a threatening video circulated among official Chinese Communist Party channels warns.

www.news.com.au

Is probably only empty threats however if China were to actually hit Japanese cities with nuclear weapons they would have to go after major US/Coalition ships as well otherwise they would have nuclear weapons inbound on Chinese cities within minutes.
The only ships that they couldn't effectively hit would be the US nuclear submarines and that would spell the deaths of 200M+ chinese.

China has an official position of never using nuclear weapons, except in retaliation for a nuclear attack.

America would have to use them first. History shows the USA is far more cavalier about using, and threatening to use, nukes than anyone else.

 

[madmug]

Jeez every country brings up battles fought ages ago to stir up the masses. Look at the controversy over the US Confederate flags, statutes of Confederate leaders and revisionism of the war that still exists 150 years after the Confederacy permanently ceased to exist.

In the UK there was constant mention of the WW2, the Battle of Britain, fighting the jerries, in the Brexit debate even when Germany is now the UK’s second largest trading partner.

And yes we here in Australia do it. Anzac Day and Gallipoli has been politicised over recent years, with a campaign to change a government in Turkey 105 years ago having zero effect on the lives of modern day Australians.

I disagree with the idea ANZAC day has been 'politicised'. It was in the 70's 80's due to the Vietnam effect. If anything I think its more respectful & non political now. That's how it should be.

The Conservative types like to stir up 'nationalism', especially with the refugee issue. Other than that we generally ignore the jingoistic tendencies of the Conservative types. The attitude to going to war in Iraq showed that.

Unfortunately the CCP are doing a great job of causing such emotions/fears to rise.

 

[madmug]

China has an official position of never using nuclear weapons, except in retaliation for a nuclear attack.

America would have to use them first. History shows the USA is far more cavalier about using, and threatening to use, nukes than anyone else.

North Korea says Hi!!!

Cavalier? The USSR sent nukes to Cuba FFS! The cold war was a difficult time. We're all probably lucky to still be here!!

Australia let the Brits practise with their nukes here in the 1950's.

Certainly General MacArthur wanted to use Nukes in Korea, Truman sacked him.

The US did use them in WW2. The circumstances were different to any other time. One can argue in hindsight, but that's simplistic to say the least.

 

[VineySMASH]

North Korea says Hi!!!

Cavalier? The USSR sent nukes to Cuba FFS! The cold war was a difficult time. We're all probably lucky to still be here!!

Australia let the Brits practise with their nukes here in the 1950's.

Certainly General MacArthur wanted to use Nukes in Korea, Truman sacked him.

The US did use them in WW2. The circumstances were different to any other time. One can argue in hindsight, but that's simplistic to say the least.

MacArthur also wanted to nuke Shanghai, Beijing and Hong Kong.

If I'm being forced to choose who is more likely to actually use nuclear weapons between the USA and China, its USA every time. They've actually done it, and they've made many threats of it over the years, even causing a constitutional crisis.

China has an actual policy to never use them except for retaliation if they get nuked first. The threat of China nuking someone is very low on the list of problems between the Anglo world and China.

 

[Rob R]

Yet China is allowing state controlled media to boast of nuking Japan if they dare to support the independent nation of Taiwan if the CCP attacks it.

'Military fanboys' shared a video threatening nuclear war. This is why China allowed it

Was the sharing of a video threatening nuclear war a message from Beijing or a low-level official going a little rogue? One expert says it could be both.

www.abc.net.au

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ExcitementMachine]

MacArthur also wanted to nuke Shanghai, Beijing and Hong Kong.

If I'm being forced to choose who is more likely to actually use nuclear weapons between the USA and China, its USA every time. They've actually done it, and they've made many threats of it over the years, even causing a constitutional crisis.

China has an actual policy to never use them except for retaliation if they get nuked first. The threat of China nuking someone is very low on the list of problems between the Anglo world and China.

Anyone can cherry pick history to suit their own agenda narrative, it's what makes our University administration in the humanities so flawed. Right now you'd have to be a moron to skimp past history and claim the US is more likely on the back of overt nuclear threats, especially with Donald no longer in charge, or in your case an agenda.

Luckily in a democracy the US can vote bigots like Trump out, China is stuck with Xi.
I know Australia has backed the US in wars, regardless of one's opinions - the insurance policy is coming home to roost - that's a bitter pill to swallow for our Univerisities admin.

The Universities and ABC types would rather scream how racist, sexist, nationalistic, our society is - ultimately they don't wear the monetary costs of what it's like to live under conservative governments who they rinse and repeat help elect time and time again.

Fun fact - Greens voters have more money, overall much more afluent then the rest of society, always important to remember.

 

[VineySMASH]

Anyone can cherry pick history to suit their own agenda narrative, it's what makes our University administration in the humanities so flawed. Right now you'd have to be a moron to skimp past history and claim the US is more likely on the back of overt nuclear threats, especially with Donald no longer in charge, or in your case an agenda.

We are luckier than China in a democracy - we can vote out bigots like Trump - China is stuck with Xi.
The Universities and ABC types would rather scream how racist, sexist, nationalistic, our society is - ultimately they don't wear the monetary costs of what it's like to live under conservative governments.

Fun fact - Greens voters have more money, overall much more afluent then the rest of society, always important to remember.

What do Greens voters' income levels, universities or the abc have to do with this thread?

I'm not 'cherry picking' histroy, I'm pointing out the absolute fact that the US has used nukes in Asia and threatened to use nukes specifically against China - whereas China has a policy of never using nukes except in retaliation for a nuclear strike.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

 

[ExcitementMachine]

What do Greens voters' income levels, universities or the abc have to do with this thread?

I'm not 'cherry picking' histroy, I'm pointing out the absolute fact that the US has used nukes in Asia and threatened to use nukes specifically against China - whereas China has a policy of never using nukes except in retaliation for a nuclear strike.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

Oh it's not my feelings - I'm saying YOU have an agenda. You're facts are wrong - a few months ago it's a FACT CCP operatives issues nuclear threats upon Japan.

I'm pointing out what your agenda is. You reek of greens voter, arts student type.