if china does use biological or chemical weapons against the US... there would be a lot of VF nerve gas and mustard gas over china very soon..Capt. Foley wrote:
Might wanna check this out, Ive done the best I could to find something that says this is bull shit but I couldnt. I still think this might not be true though. http://www.geocities.com/testament1212/ … nstUS.html
Hmmmm that crazy chinese guy that wants to start WW3 needs to be assasinated
Well obviously we will all be losers in a major war, but in a war where someone wins, its like this.YunDog wrote:
I think its a safe bet to say no-oneAust1mh wrote:
in the next big war.... who will win??
Today, my money is on the USA. In Ten years, my money is on China.
In fact, thats going in my sig.
My take on this is that the economic ties between the two nations will prevent any military conflict from braking out. None of the two would have anything to gain from such a conflict.
These days, wars are no longer fought because of territory. That's a concept that's old-fashioned.
It's all about resources and ideologic / religiously motivated conflicts today, and atm, there are no tensions between the US and China in that regard.
Resources ( namely oil ) might become an issue in the future, but fighting over it would seem incredibly short-sighted to me, because a war over oil would also consume a lot of it. We are going to run out of oil eventually, no need to fight over it.
I can hardly comment on the military aspect of the debate. I am not an expert on these issues.
I am pretty certain of two things though:
1.) None of the two has the capabilities to invade the other. Both are huge nations, and neither one could provide enough soldiers to effectively conquer and control the other's territory, while keeping his own borders safe at the same time.
2.) No one "wins" a nuclear conflict. Even the chinese know that.
These days, wars are no longer fought because of territory. That's a concept that's old-fashioned.
It's all about resources and ideologic / religiously motivated conflicts today, and atm, there are no tensions between the US and China in that regard.
Resources ( namely oil ) might become an issue in the future, but fighting over it would seem incredibly short-sighted to me, because a war over oil would also consume a lot of it. We are going to run out of oil eventually, no need to fight over it.
I can hardly comment on the military aspect of the debate. I am not an expert on these issues.
I am pretty certain of two things though:
1.) None of the two has the capabilities to invade the other. Both are huge nations, and neither one could provide enough soldiers to effectively conquer and control the other's territory, while keeping his own borders safe at the same time.
2.) No one "wins" a nuclear conflict. Even the chinese know that.
you, B.schuss, just earned Karma for as many times i see you name
Communism never works and I doubt China will be an exception. My hopes are that the people of china will demand reforms and new freedoms. If we do go to war though my money will always be with America. The only thing that would worry me is that hippies would start protesting etc........
And by the way, stop calling the USA "America" It isn't america, its just one small part of america.-=NHB=- Bananahands wrote:
Communism never works and I doubt China will be an exception. My hopes are that the people of china will demand reforms and new freedoms. If we do go to war though my money will always be with America. The only thing that would worry me is that hippies would start protesting etc........
And while I agree with B.schuss, I could see a territorially motivated conflict between these two if china continues to talk about "lost territory" and starts getting all expansionist on us.
No. You can thank us for defending you later silly Canuck.{DsM}SongofWar[BoC] wrote:
And by the way, stop calling the USA "America" It isn't america, its just one small part of america.-=NHB=- Bananahands wrote:
Communism never works and I doubt China will be an exception. My hopes are that the people of china will demand reforms and new freedoms. If we do go to war though my money will always be with America. The only thing that would worry me is that hippies would start protesting etc........
And while I agree with B.schuss, I could see a territorially motivated conflict between these two if china continues to talk about "lost territory" and starts getting all expansionist on us.
THE MORE YOU KNOW:
Bananahands is a Canadian who defected to the United States and now gladly bashes our healthcare system.
Hi Banana!
Bananahands is a Canadian who defected to the United States and now gladly bashes our healthcare system.
Hi Banana!
all the money they got it comes from the crap they sell to the world so they never will attack the hand who keeps them because all the countries who receive china stuff will help usa in a war with china.
A patriotic country is the best that USA can have, none saying their state should be independent and those crap
A patriotic country is the best that USA can have, none saying their state should be independent and those crap
Lawl I have been living in Texas longer than I lived up there so I think I have the right to call myself American now lol. And your socialist health care system is cool.......................... for me to poop on.Vampira_NB wrote:
THE MORE YOU KNOW:
Bananahands is a Canadian who defected to the United States and now gladly bashes our healthcare system.
Hi Banana!
Screw you and your capitalism! I'll take my Social Democracy damnit!... oh wait, Canada's capitalist... damnit!
We still have great healthcare! Thank you Tommy Douglas! (For the Americans who do not know, Tommy Douglas was voted as the Greatest Canadian of all time. Go check on Wikipedia for more info about him)
We still have great healthcare! Thank you Tommy Douglas! (For the Americans who do not know, Tommy Douglas was voted as the Greatest Canadian of all time. Go check on Wikipedia for more info about him)
Treason!Vampira_NB wrote:
THE MORE YOU KNOW:
Bananahands is a Canadian who defected to the United States and now gladly bashes our healthcare system.
Hi Banana!
So wait, I DON'T need to pay thousands of dollars to have life saving surgery? HOLY SHIT! THATS HORRIBLE!!!!
And didn't we technically beat the americans in a war once?
That is very unlikely. As I learned on my trip to China, it is not communist at all in some regards in others it is very communistic which may have it's benefits on some levels. Let me explain: even the Communist Party is officially pro capitalism and is also introducing it to the chinese economy. Officialy they say that it is a means or a transitional stage before they can reach the "communist" ideal. It is very odd and seems like double-talk but on the other hand it works for them.-=NHB=- Bananahands wrote:
Communism never works and I doubt China will be an exception. My hopes are that the people of china will demand reforms and new freedoms.
The how is it still communist? Politically it is still a one-party state where the Communist Party has all the power. They can change laws (the legal system is a pure minefield btw as is the banking system), regulations or just about anything overnight and everybody has to follow these rules. One could say: the communist party is the law. I say this has it's benefits because the chinese governement can react to things a lot quicker than democratic lawmakers can. There you have to write a bill hand it to congress or however the legislation is called in your country then they have to debate, vote and finally accept it and then it has to be put in motion. In my country it takes about 6-10 years for a law to be effective. That's a big difference.
Anyway, if you want an interesting article to read about this issue you should get the Newsweek from April 24, 2006. The title says it all:"China vs US: The real clash of civilizations".
I am not american and I didn't know either. I thought the Greatest Canadians ever were Stan and Philippe.Vampira_NB wrote:
For the Americans who do not know, Tommy Douglas was voted as the Greatest Canadian of all time.
Reminds me of the USSR, it's bubble hasnt bursted yet.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
wait, you're already paying thousands of dollars in taxes to fund that crack whore's STD treatment? HOLY SHIT! THAT'S GREAT!!!{DsM}SongofWar[BoC] wrote:
Treason!Vampira_NB wrote:
THE MORE YOU KNOW:
Bananahands is a Canadian who defected to the United States and now gladly bashes our healthcare system.
Hi Banana!
So wait, I DON'T need to pay thousands of dollars to have life saving surgery? HOLY SHIT! THATS HORRIBLE!!!!
And didn't we technically beat the americans in a war once?
What? this is not about BF2? Its about the real america, and the real china!Des.Kmal wrote:
bf2 chatter?
mod please move this
And I think China would win a fight, becasue of its huge population and nonetheless advanced technology. China is although not a democratic country, and has, just like a few of you guys mentioned, a lot of problems, including water issues and infrastructure etc. So in the end, it will be a close fight. Hopefully, it will never get to that.
technology and hardware is all america, as well as experience, as china hasn't been in a direct war action for some time, high population numbers=target rich environment
http://www.georgiapeace.org/USmilitary%20Budget.htm
http://www.georgiapeace.org/USmilitary%20Budget.htm
To be honest, I'd rather live in China than the US, but then maybe it is because I love Chenese history...
However on the real issue, I'm British, I don't give a toss until its right in my face
However on the real issue, I'm British, I don't give a toss until its right in my face
America does spend lots more money on their military, but it doesn't necessarily mean they'll win.
The US has spent stupid amounts of money trying to make lasers and particle beams and other very high tech ways to neutralise enemy satellites. As far as I know, they don't even work yet.
China's anti satellite system is a capsule filled with ball bearings. It moves into an area that the orbit of the enemy satellite will go through then releases the ball bearing cloud. Round comes the satellite and annihilates itself and after a few days the cloud will fall to the earth as it isn't placed in a stable orbit, allowing them to still use that orbit themselves.
There was another good example after the cold war when the US and Russian space agencies were discussing how they got past the various problems. The US realised ball point pens didn't work in space so they spent loads of money making a pen that would work in space (and underwater if I recall correctly).
The Russians used pencils.
The US has spent stupid amounts of money trying to make lasers and particle beams and other very high tech ways to neutralise enemy satellites. As far as I know, they don't even work yet.
China's anti satellite system is a capsule filled with ball bearings. It moves into an area that the orbit of the enemy satellite will go through then releases the ball bearing cloud. Round comes the satellite and annihilates itself and after a few days the cloud will fall to the earth as it isn't placed in a stable orbit, allowing them to still use that orbit themselves.
There was another good example after the cold war when the US and Russian space agencies were discussing how they got past the various problems. The US realised ball point pens didn't work in space so they spent loads of money making a pen that would work in space (and underwater if I recall correctly).
The Russians used pencils.
I don't know if someone has beat me to this, but I think that for the time being, the greatest problems the US will be facing will stem from the inside.
China may be growing fast, but I doubt if they can seriously jeopardize the USA's position and interests by standing against them alone.
As for the possibility of a future coalition involving China, I don't know if they will be able to resist being undermined by the USA on a political level. Because I dont think this is a matter of firepower - since everyone has nukes etc.
History has shown that nothing lasts for ever. So when the US loses its edge, I think it will be more like the Roman Empire... due to turbulence caused by the American people and not by some outside power.
China may be growing fast, but I doubt if they can seriously jeopardize the USA's position and interests by standing against them alone.
As for the possibility of a future coalition involving China, I don't know if they will be able to resist being undermined by the USA on a political level. Because I dont think this is a matter of firepower - since everyone has nukes etc.
History has shown that nothing lasts for ever. So when the US loses its edge, I think it will be more like the Roman Empire... due to turbulence caused by the American people and not by some outside power.
ƒ³
Interesting. I just recently watched an episode of "Futureweapons" on the Discovery channel that hinted otherwise. Besides.....:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:
America does spend lots more money on their military, but it doesn't necessarily mean they'll win.
The US has spent stupid amounts of money trying to make lasers and particle beams and other very high tech ways to neutralise enemy satellites. As far as I know, they don't even work yet.
The US has had, at the very minimum, F15-based antisatellite capability since sometime in the early 1980's that was very reliable. Anything beyond that is "just frosting on the cake.".:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:
China's anti satellite system is a capsule filled with ball bearings. It moves into an area that the orbit of the enemy satellite will go through then releases the ball bearing cloud. Round comes the satellite and annihilates itself and after a few days the cloud will fall to the earth as it isn't placed in a stable orbit, allowing them to still use that orbit themselves.
LOL, I know this pen that you speak of. Oddly enough, it was created by a commercial company, and is one of their products that is on sale to anyone. So, what you're saying is that the US government spent money on an item, from a western hemisphere capitalist based company, that can be marketed and sold to the public around the world for money, and is thus a part of the economic system..:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:
There was another good example after the cold war when the US and Russian space agencies were discussing how they got past the various problems. The US realised ball point pens didn't work in space so they spent loads of money making a pen that would work in space (and underwater if I recall correctly).
The Russians used pencils.
Don't forget that spending government money typically results in the country's own people being put to work, making money to live and spend with, and thus resulting in a healthier economy.
Plus, it's a funny thing about pencils... they smear easier than ink, and gradually fade quicker over time.
I'd really hate to be the cosmonaut that winds up having to review his notes, under pressure, and wipes away an important piece of information because his palms were sweaty.
------------------------------------------------
In conclusion,
It's not a bad thing to spend money on the development of new technology, because the alternative is far worse.
ya and dont forget US ends tooMiller wrote:
If China has nukes then maybe no one, maybe US, actually, yeah US. Once China fires one nuke at us, well, China ends.YunDog wrote:
I think its a safe bet to say no-oneAust1mh wrote:
in the next big war.... who will win??
if any of then starts throwing Nukes - which they will - particularly if things start going badly for them
then the planet is fucked
right
not china
not USA
THE WHOLE FUCKING PLANET
and for the dudes that posted they this so and so will win because - youve clearly got no concept
so they (china) get 1 hit on the US - ie New York - you think all those dead will feel like winners
go and talk to a veteran - theyll be the first to tell you - there are no winners - only losers in WAR
China isnt a direct threat to the US. However, if China makes a move to reclaim Korea, we could have another cold war. The US already has troops in Korea, and would be at a huge disadvantage. I'm certain the US would lose in a real conflict, but with nuclear arms involved, the diplomacy would be the real warzone. What would happen diplomatically? I have no clue.
But, I think China has no dreams of expansionism aside from Hong Kong, which would upset the US, but not much we could do.
But, I think China has no dreams of expansionism aside from Hong Kong, which would upset the US, but not much we could do.