A U.S. - China war? [Opinion]

The Los Angeles Times ^ | October 10, 2007 | Joseph Farah

[yorkie]

Don't back down to China's overt military threats By Joseph Farah

Dear Andrés,

As I understand it, you and President Bush believe it is in America's best interest to help China expand its economy through partnerships, sharing technology, Import-Export Bank loans, investment and relaxed trade requirements and allowing them to buy U.S. companies of strategic importance -- like 3Com.

I disagree.

What China needs to do to improve the plight of its people is to abandon the failed experiment with command-and-control socialism that has created a nightmare world of totalitarianism for more than 1 billion people.

President Reagan rejected similar policies toward the Soviet Union and created the conditions that resulted in the Evil Empire imploding of its own dead weight in a peaceful revolution. Reagan rejected the failed policies of the past, in which the United States tried to "help" the Soviet Union with bailouts and other random acts of kindness - virtually everything we're doing with China today.

China is the Evil Empire of the future. You don't have to be a prophet to see it. You only need to be a student of history. It was just two years ago that a top Chinese military official said Beijing would use nuclear weapons against the U.S. if Americans defended Taiwan against an invasion from the mainland.

"If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons," Zhu Chenghu, a major general in the People's Liberation Army, said at an official briefing.

Chas Freeman, a former U.S. assistant secretary of Defense, said in 1999 that a PLA official had told him China would respond with a nuclear strike on the U.S. in the event of a conflict with Taiwan.

[Just another Joe]

And this surprises who?

China is well on it's way to poisoning our young, killing our pets, and taking over strategic companys.

How much of this do you think is coincidence?

[Sgt_Schultze]

China is a problem. After a generation of a one child policy, millions of men have reached marrying age without the prospect of finding a mate - ever. Such a predicament may force unrest toward the Chinese government. A sure way to redirect unrest is to go to war.

China could field an army of millions. They are a problem.

[indthkr]

chicom bump for later........

[SwankyC]

but but, free trade is growing jobs here and that’s important for the middle class of America.... /barf

[glide625]

With all due regard for the importance for survival I simply don’t see the U.S. winning in an armed conflict with China. If you want to endure the loss of millions of Americans lives in an nuclear war, take on China. The only answer to China is to wait them out. They know we can’t beat them in a conventional war on their home turf and that we’d be forced to engage them in a nuclear exchange. No one wins under that scenario but truth be told, with a population 5 times that of the U.S. and a geographic size greater than that of the U.S. when you take into account the size of the region as a whole, China is far more likely to survive a nuclear exchange than is the U.S. It appears to me that time is on our side with China although ultimate resolution may be at Taiwan’s expense.

[JMJJR]

They could take a lesson from the mooselimbs,

hey you single guys, there’s 72 brides over that there hill, once we invade, new brides for everyone (who survives)!

[SCHROLL]

and here I was torn between learning Spanish and converting to Islam to fit in with the peaceniks. Guess I better get my Mao pajamas as well. No one wants a nuclear war to be sure, but your way pretty much guarantees we’ll be overrun just because of sheer numbers. Should we simply surrender now to make you feel better about things?

[steel_resolve]

They have 5 times the population of America, which also amounts to 5 times the mouths to feed. They get millions upon millions of tons of foodstuffs from the US (mostly grains and livestock feeds) That would end in the event of a war. We are much better prepared, at least from a food situation, to survive a war than China is...

[taxed2death]

....never happen. Walmart must live on.

[qam1]

They know we can’t beat them in a conventional war on their home turf and that we’d be forced to engage them in a nuclear exchange.

One Cruise missle hit on the Three Gorges Dam, war over, we win

[qam1]

They know we can’t beat them in a conventional war on their home turf and that we’d be forced to engage them in a nuclear exchange.

One Cruise missle hit on the Three Gorges Dam, war over, we win

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

To: yorkie

Currently, an all-out war between the PRC and the United States is very remote.

China is hard pressed to keep up its economic rise so as to suppress potential unrest among its people. While the one-child policy has led to a higher percentage of boys, there is huge pressure on those [sometimes] single children to provide for their progenitors, not only their parents, but also their grandparents. A sizable proportion of young Chinese men dying in a war is almost guaranteed to spark an uprising within China. The United States and allies are currently by far China's largest trading partners. The trade sanctions imposed by a declaration of war would collapse the Chinese economy.

Similarly, due in part to bad judgment, the United States is becoming more and more dependent on China. China is a major source of imports, and also one of the larger nations to which the United States exports--a sign of how bad the United States is currently with exporting, even with a cheaper dollar. With China's trillion dollar plus trade surplus, which has been used to buy plenty of American dollars, China is protecting the United States from the country's huge account deficit. If war is declared, China could conceivably collapse the American economy, too.

So, total war between the United States and China (and it would almost have to be total war) seems to be far in the future, if at all.

Posted on 10/10/2007 2:00:03 PM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail? )

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

Hmmmm.....

Both were somewhat of a failure.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“China is well on it’s way to poisoning our young, killing our pets, and taking over strategic companys.

How much of this do you think is coincidence?”

Having done business in Beijing, I can tell you that the Chinese leaders are a patient lot......they could wait many more years to do us real harm. They are ruthless!

[yorkie]

>>We are much better prepared, at least from a food situation, to survive a war than China is...<<

Seems that a lot of food we consume comes from China - and much of it is contaminated (not just pet food).

I’m for all labeling to display country of origin.

[mowowie]

Interesting though. :)

[snowrip]

No one wins under that scenario but truth be told, with a population 5 times that of the U.S. and a geographic size greater than that of the U.S. when you take into account the size of the region as a whole, China is far more likely to survive a nuclear exchange than is the U.S.

Uhhhhhh... China isn't that much bigger than the US, and much of it is desert... which is why they import so much food from us. Their population centers are very, very dense, and resources are scarce. They are like the Russians, with a few giant manufacturing and power grids set closely together rather than smaller ones spaced farther apart. Any armed conflict shuts down these areas, and the food supply, immediately.

Also, the Chinese have roughly 60-80 weapons capable of reaching the US. We have several thousand capable of reaching China. Hardly quid pro quo.

[snowrip]

60-80 weapons

Make that "60-80 strategic nuclear weapons".