China Wary of Speedy US Victory

[jegs2]

China has eyed the speed with which US forces have conducted their assault of Iraq, and many in China now believe a conflict with the US will come sooner, rather than later:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=31931

[Joe]

I guess slippery slope arguments are not a problem for global powers, either.

[Darth Wong]

It's not a slippery slope argument. A slippery slope argument is a chain of increasingly bad events foretold as the result of a single event without established causality.

This, on the other hand, is merely China feeling intimidated by the American military's prowess.

[HemlockGrey]

Sort of like international penis envy.

[Xenophobe3691]

Sort of like international penis envy.

Nah, penis envy doesn't lead to war...Well, George Carlin thinks otherwise

[Joe]

"Of more concern, as People's Daily commentator Huang Peizhao pointed out, is the view that U.S. moves in the Middle East 'have served the goal of seeking worldwide domination.'

This is.

[Darth Wong]

"Of more concern, as People's Daily commentator Huang Peizhao pointed out, is the view that U.S. moves in the Middle East 'have served the goal of seeking worldwide domination.'

This is.

No it isn't. That is merely one of several possible interpretations of the motives behind America's recent actions, not "A leads to B leads to C leads to D, therefore A will cause D". Your over-eagerness to slap a fallacy name on their fears does not validate your misuse of logic terms.

[Joe]

OK, fair enough. They aren't claiming that D is inevitable, so I guess I was in the wrong here.

[Crown]

Ahhh not to be the whistle blower here or anything, but this article is a little bit of bull. Let me explain. While I believe that the Chinese military are jealous and a little in awe of American military operations in the Gulf (and rightly so, say what you will about this war, the American military has demostrated its self admirably), I do not believe that they are out to 'beat the US' now any more so than they were before. China has for a very long time been aspiring to expand its military to a more 'force projection' device for decades now.

What I do believe is that China is now made out to be the boogey man of the 2000's much like Russia (USSR) was in the 1900's. Especially if you read some of the attached links to this article; How China hopes to defeat the West, China advancing laser weapons program, China develops anti-satellite weapon etc. This to me seems like the Pentagon and the DoD trying to justify procurements of new funds.

Remember when the Mig 25 hit the stage? It was meant to routinely cruise at Mach 3.3 (while it could do this, it nearly always melted the engine, Mach 2.9 was its actual limit within safety requirements), it was meant to be highly maneouvarable (when in fact it turned like a brick, when it turned at all), it was meant to have a highly advanced and sophisticated electronics outfit, with a radar the surpased anything the West had at the time (when in fact it was nothing more than a scale-up of archaic technology and it was a court martial offence to turn it on prior to actually having taken off, due to the fact that it could 'zap a rabbit at 30 paces').

This article smacks of the same thing. While I do not doubt that the Chinese have shown an interest in developing these systems, I find it hardly likely that they demonstrate the attributes that these articles lead us to believe.

EDIT: Oh by the way it still makes for great reading !
EDIT: Fixed typo boo-boo.

[Joe]

Does China even have more than a few aircraft carriers yet?

[Crown]

Does China even have more than a few aircraft carriers yet?

Err, China doesn't even have any landing ships capable of taking on Taiwan... AFAIK they don't have any aircraft carriers at all!

[Joe]

Does China even have more than a few aircraft carriers yet?

Err, China doesn't even have any landing ships capable of taking on Taiwan... AFAIK they don't have any aircraft carriers at all!

Yeah, but I read a while back they were on the way to getting some. Guess not. In any case, that's just one of the many reasons China has such a long way to go.

[Crown]

I am sure that it will eventually be a goal for China, but for now they are concentrating on submarines in order to subvert US dominace in the sea. Especially SSBN's as they are soley lacking them.

[Crown]

For all of those that care, have a read of this. It is an article by the Cetre of Defence Information (CDI), titled; Is China an Aggressive Power. For another take on the matter.

[Joe]

Good article, says what should be obvious to everyone short of Cold War leftovers.

[Crown]

Indeed.

EDIT: Oh and jegs, sorry for hijacking your thread !

[Joe]

I hate to admit it, being a pro-America guy and all, but I would say that the U.S. is more likely to aggressively engage China than the other way around.

[Crown]

I doubt it. The one common factor in human behaivour you can always count on is greed. And China has 1 billion+ people that need to be fed, clothed and acceorised.

[Sokar]

Does China even have more than a few aircraft carriers yet?

Err, China doesn't even have any landing ships capable of taking on Taiwan... AFAIK they don't have any aircraft carriers at all!

Yeah, but I read a while back they were on the way to getting some. Guess not. In any case, that's just one of the many reasons China has such a long way to go.

China along with India and Brazil were interested in purchasing the single non-STVOL carrier the Russians finished prior to the collapse. Its an on again off again kinda thing.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

I hate to admit it, being a pro-America guy and all, but I would say that the U.S. is more likely to aggressively engage China than the other way around.

Why would we want to do that? Many companies depend on Chinese labor to make their products, and agressive action might cut them off.

[Joe]

I hate to admit it, being a pro-America guy and all, but I would say that the U.S. is more likely to aggressively engage China than the other way around.

Why would we want to do that? Many companies depend on Chinese labor to make their products, and agressive action might cut them off.

We wouldn't, that's my point. Neither side is likely by any stretch of the imagination to engage the other, especially with the excellent trade relationship enjoyed between the two.

[Sokar]

The US and China have reason to be wary of one another, but our economies are far to linked to make any near term hostility a real likelyhood. I'd be far more worried by the threat of a Sino-Russian conflict or Sino-India conflict. Currently India is to occupied with Pakistan to be a real worry for the Chinese, however the Russians are another matter all together. All the resources China needs are only a hop skip and a heavy armored thrust away in central and Eastern Russia, timber , oil and arable land to feed the hungry billions of China. I dont think China seeks parity with the US but will setttle for parity or mild superiority to Russian weapons and let their superior ability to absorb casualties do the rest.

Admittedly, Russia's nuclear arsenal makes this unlikely, but who knows.

For my money, the Bear and the Dragon is my pick for the next major world conflict.

[Stuart Mackey]

China has eyed the speed with which US forces have conducted their assault of Iraq, and many in China now believe a conflict with the US will come sooner, rather than later:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=31931

Given China's infrastructure, levels of education and the depth of their economy I would say they have about 50 years befor they could hope to beat the USA in a fight. In 50 years time I will be 77 years old.

[Vympel]

Remember when the Mig 25 hit the stage? It was meant to routinely cruise at Mach 3.3 (while it could do this, it nearly always melted the engine, Mach 2.9 was its actual limit within safety requirements), it was meant to be highly maneouvarable (when in fact it turned like a brick, when it turned at all), it was meant to have a highly advanced and sophisticated electronics outfit, with a radar the surpased anything the West had at the time (when in fact it was nothing more than a scale-up of archaic technology and it was a court martial offence to turn it on prior to actually having taken off, due to the fact that it could 'zap a rabbit at 30 paces').

Mate,

*It was the US* who slapped their ridiculous notions of superfighter capabilites onto that aircraft, not the Soviets. The MiG-25 is an aviation CLASSIC. It was designed to be a high speed interceptor for the PVO, and that's exactly what the PVO got.

It wasn't meant to be highly maneuverable. It wasn't meant to have highly advanced electronics better than anything the West had. The radar was designed that way on purpose: it was not designed for long range detection, that was ground control's job. It was optimized for accurate targeting in the face of heavy ECM. To burn through hostile jamming, the output was tremendous- 600kW.

To quote one of my aircraft books:

"The best analogy is Spitfire performance achieved with Sopwith Camel technology ... the result was an outstanding single mission interceptor, and the fact that Western intelligence misconstrued it as an air superiority fighter should not detract from it's undeniable virtues"

[Axis Kast]

As the world slides back into multipolarity, China will vie with the United States for the coveted position of "first among near-equals."

While the Chinese are likely to follow the American plan at first - export capital earned by domestic industry to Southeast Asia, thereby confronting American hegemony directly, dollar for dollar -, they are also expected to be less blatantly agressive. Proxy wars are one thing, and Chinese power projection - non-existant and this point - another. We'll see them soup up their blue-water navy for purposes of pomp - and a poor attempt to develop the old Soviet "hedgehog" defense of missile cruisers rather than aircraft carriers -, but don't expect anything grand.

Thankfully, the Chinese will keep their hands full playing with Russia in Central Asia and knocking shoulders with India in the Himalayas. They won't be welcomed as a new power just as we are no longer beloved in our position.