T Nation

China Building Military Might

WASHINGTON - China is modernizing its military in ways that give it options for launching surprise attacks, potentially far from its borders, the
Pentagon said Friday.

In an annual report to Congress, the Pentagon said the Chinese are acquiring better missiles, submarines and aircraft and should more fully explain the purpose of a military buildup that has led some to view China as a threat.

http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/70244/Pentagon_China_Building_Military_Might

Maybe they are planning to liberate Cuba…

Of course China will. It would be dumb for them not to. Because:

(a.) they know that as the world’s superpower (for now) we (the US, that is) leans a little too far forward in foreign policy and it would be in the best interest of any nation with the capacity to arm itself to do so for self defence against us regardless of current political affiliations.

(b.) they know full well that the boat loads of money we are borrowing from them is not going to be returned anytime soon. if they ever need a little of it back, a peaceful ‘ask the US nicely’ isn’t going to do shit.

(c.) with our declining economic influence around the world (things going to euro and the $ falling) another nation will eventually fill the power vacuum and they are making sure that they will at least have a chance to have a shot at gainging the most influence when the time comes.

floripa

Unless they can come up with a way to reassert an advantage for the Offense (Defense is in the ascendancy now), their buildup is somewhat pointless.

The goal of any buildup is the projection of power. They see the USA topping out (with huge debts besides) and wish to begin asserting their power, as history teaches. We did the same thing to Britain, as they did to Holland and Spain, and on and on.

We’ll now have a Great Crash (circa 1929), China will attempt to assert its hegemony; but bioweapons and stinger missiles make most offensive weapons obsolete. They will have a lot of trouble bringing order back to the world.

We’re screwed.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Unless they can come up with a way to reassert an advantage for the Offense (Defense is in the ascendancy now), their buildup is somewhat pointless.

The goal of any buildup is the projection of power. They see the USA topping out (with huge debts besides) and wish to begin asserting their power, as history teaches. We did the same thing to Britain, as they did to Holland and Spain, and on and on.

We’ll now have a Great Crash (circa 1929), China will attempt to assert its hegemony; but bioweapons and stinger missiles make most offensive weapons obsolete. They will have a lot of trouble bringing order back to the world.

We’re screwed. [/quote]

Bioweapons and stinger missles make most offensive weapons obsolete? The defense is in the acendancy now? Please elaborate on this absurdity and give us some examples from recent history. Better yet, give us the source that you drew these conclusions from.

[quote]BH6 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Unless they can come up with a way to reassert an advantage for the Offense (Defense is in the ascendancy now), their buildup is somewhat pointless.

The goal of any buildup is the projection of power. They see the USA topping out (with huge debts besides) and wish to begin asserting their power, as history teaches. We did the same thing to Britain, as they did to Holland and Spain, and on and on.

We’ll now have a Great Crash (circa 1929), China will attempt to assert its hegemony; but bioweapons and stinger missiles make most offensive weapons obsolete. They will have a lot of trouble bringing order back to the world.

We’re screwed.

Bioweapons and stinger missles make most offensive weapons obsolete? The defense is in the acendancy now? Please elaborate on this absurdity and give us some examples from recent history. Better yet, give us the source that you drew these conclusions from.

[/quote]

Absurdity? How do you think the Afghans ‘convinced’ the Russians to get out of Afghanistan? One dude holding a cheap stinger takes down very expensive attack helicopters.

Do you know what an IED is? Its an explosive often put into a parabolic container to direct the force. It can take out an Abrahms easily. And an Abrahms tank ain’t exactly cheap…

One of these days, someone will invent a highly contagious and dangerous flu virus. One that’s highly lethal. One of Allah’s martyrs will take a little plane ride (while being contagious) to Berlin, Paris, London, New York, you name it. Then, the trillions spent on obsolete weapons won’t do us one whole hell of a lot of good, now will they?

The only way out is if someone in our labs can invent nanotech robots to lobotomize into docility the whole world. Have bots that are geared to put everyone into Happyland. Otherwise, this world will look like something from The Chronicles of Riddick.

Countries have an army. Developed and richer countries have a modern army. Backward and poor countries don’t.

Since China is changing from essentially a 3rd world country to an industrialized country, they are modernizing their army.

I’m surprised that people are surprised by this.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Absurdity? …

One of these days, someone will invent a highly contagious and dangerous flu virus. One that’s highly lethal. One of Allah’s martyrs will take a little plane ride (while being contagious) to Berlin, Paris, London, New York, you name it. Then, the trillions spent on obsolete weapons won’t do us one whole hell of a lot of good, now will they?

The only way out is if someone in our labs can invent nanotech robots to lobotomize into docility the whole world. Have bots that are geared to put everyone into Happyland. Otherwise, this world will look like something from The Chronicles of Riddick.

[/quote]
HH, did you just see “28 Weeks Later?” I mean, that conspiracy theory is so old! Sure, it’s got potential, but the more virulent a sickness is, the quicker it matures. By the time you get across the ocean, the guy will be very, very sick and quarantine would be placed on the flight en route. The CDC takes this very seriously. Besides, you think someone like Bin Laden has the facilities to make a super virus? In a cave? Next, you’ll be telling us Lara Croft has just found Pandora’s Box.

Nanotech robots are very much in the works. Drugs that circumvent individual actions already exist. They don’t work together. You’d need a viable dose amount for the drug to be effective… far greater than the size of nanobots. Nanobots are smaller than what the naked eye can perceive. Drug doses are easily visible.

And when you got all “Riddick,” well, you totally lost it. It is more likely that we’d send our future into a world that more resembles a New Stone Age. Like Planet of the Apes without monkeys.

Chronicles of Riddick. Bah! If we master space travel, you think some virus will wipe us out? You didn’t think this out, man. But it is fun watching someone dive off the deep end.

[quote]kroby wrote:
But it is fun watching someone dive off the deep end.[/quote]

He’s been doing that a lot lately. It’s awesome… considering all the water was drained a while back.

Anyway, how come nobody is suggesting a preemptive strike? Pussies!

[quote]kroby wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Absurdity? …

One of these days, someone will invent a highly contagious and dangerous flu virus. One that’s highly lethal. One of Allah’s martyrs will take a little plane ride (while being contagious) to Berlin, Paris, London, New York, you name it. Then, the trillions spent on obsolete weapons won’t do us one whole hell of a lot of good, now will they?

The only way out is if someone in our labs can invent nanotech robots to lobotomize into docility the whole world. Have bots that are geared to put everyone into Happyland. Otherwise, this world will look like something from The Chronicles of Riddick.

HH, did you just see “28 Weeks Later?” I mean, that conspiracy theory is so old! Sure, it’s got potential, but the more virulent a sickness is, the quicker it matures. By the time you get across the ocean, the guy will be very, very sick and quarantine would be placed on the flight en route. The CDC takes this very seriously. Besides, you think someone like Bin Laden has the facilities to make a super virus? In a cave? Next, you’ll be telling us Lara Croft has just found Pandora’s Box.

Nanotech robots are very much in the works. Drugs that circumvent individual actions already exist. They don’t work together. You’d need a viable dose amount for the drug to be effective… far greater than the size of nanobots. Nanobots are smaller than what the naked eye can perceive. Drug doses are easily visible.

And when you got all “Riddick,” well, you totally lost it. It is more likely that we’d send our future into a world that more resembles a New Stone Age. Like Planet of the Apes without monkeys.

Chronicles of Riddick. Bah! If we master space travel, you think some virus will wipe us out? You didn’t think this out, man. But it is fun watching someone dive off the deep end.[/quote]

Hmmm…if you can think of the problems associated with spreading a lethal flu virus or nanotech, then do you suppose someone ELSE also thought of those difficulties? That maybe they are working on those very problems and are waaay smarter than any of us?

You’re like the Whirling Dervish chieftain at the battle of Omdurman who thought how wonderful his warriors’ weapons were — until some British dude showed up with a machine gun on a gunboat…and his men had these new things called Maxim rifles…

China needs the rest of the world as much as we need it. An act of war against us or our allies would result in embargoes that would more than likely devastate the global economy.

Why are people throwing a fit about this, most of their equipment is from the 60s-70s, an upgrade was inevitable.

They still have the world’s 3rd largest nuclear weapons stockpile, but nobody seems to be screaming the end of the western world over that now are they?

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Hmmm…if you can think of the problems associated with spreading a lethal flu virus or nanotech, then do you suppose someone ELSE also thought of those difficulties? That maybe they are working on those very problems and are waaay smarter than any of us?[/quote]

No, I can’t give them that much credit. Have any police authority found a clean room in Afghanistan? Saudi Arabia? UAE? Europe? See, the problem is you need smart (and I mean very smart) scientists.

Persons with this capability in the USA are targeted by the government at High School level and brought in, so to speak. They then either develop a moral sense, or a National pride. They don’t flip. Also, most of the top scientists aren’t interested in money or post mortem glory (the coin of terrorists), they’re interested in research and published articles. I find it ludicrous thinking that “et al” would ever stand for “Al Qaida.”

[quote]You’re like the Whirling Dervish chieftain at the battle of Omdurman who thought how wonderful his warriors’ weapons were — until some British dude showed up with a machine gun on a gunboat…and his men had these new things called Maxim rifles…

[/quote]

Poor analogy. More appropriate would be Nevil Chamberlain thinking and hoping Hitler “isn’t all that bad.”

China, from its Imperial past to its Communist present has always followed a policy of letting ‘two tigers’ fight. To protect itself, it will use a strong power that is far away threaten a strong power that is close. It has generally done this by diplomatic means, but has used economic means when necessary.

Remember, it has only been in the last 250 years that it has not been a large economic power.

250 years in its cultural history is nothing, even if it is our entire history (approximately speaking).

China has always pursued policies which involve protecting itself. And it has always been expansionist. The original area from which it expanded was not the area it now claims territorially.

No one should be suprised if it uses its current economic strength (it spends a lot of money on petroleum, not as much as the US, but it is growing faster than the US demand) to sway policies that are to its favor and not the US’s.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

Do you know what an IED is? Its an explosive often put into a parabolic container to direct the force. It can take out an Abrahms easily. And an Abrahms tank ain’t exactly cheap…
[/quote]

No, that’s roughly what an EFP is. You don’t know what you’re talking about.