Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: China vs USA WW3

  1. #1
    Platinum Member pmbguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    PMB
    Posts
    2,094
    Thanks
    310
    Thanked 254 Times in 230 Posts

    China vs USA WW3

    “Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed” Mao Tse-Tung


    The US has overextended itself across the globe. It can’t sustain its reach indefinitely. Through its hard-ball foreign policy it has made enemy after enemy. The US is in a position now that they can’t pull back, they have to keep on acquiring more and more “land” to sustain themselves, much like the Roman Empire, who grew richer and more powerful only by conquering more and more territories. Like the Roman Empire, sustaining control over such a large area becomes more and more difficult. The military forces cannot defend their interests everywhere at the same time.

    Whilst the US is playing hard-ball foreign policy, China is playing soft-ball foreign policy. America goes into a country and says: “Do as we say or we will fuck you up”. China on the other hand goes in and negotiates terms in a much more subtle and diplomatic fashion.

    China is eating up Africa and the world in large chunks, they are also making huge land claims in the south China sea. They are ahead of America in the rate and sustainability of acquiring global partners. One could even say that China pushed the US out of sub-Saharan Africa except for Nigeria and one or two others. America hit back with acquiring much of North Africa (Tunisia, Libya, Egypt).

    China is winning the “financial war”, they are getting richer whilst the US is bleeding money. The US owes China so much that they pussy foot around them, allowing China to do pretty much as it pleases.

    Militarily China is far behind, they lack in both conventional and nuclear armament, but they are playing catch-up fast.

    So here is the big question: Will the US simply fade away until China naturally steps in as the new boss? Or will the US wage war against China to prevent their eventual fall from power?

    If the US had to wage war against China’s global interests, China will withhold its credit line...so that’s a no no for now. If the US had to attack China directly there would be a global financial collapse. Something the US can ill afford. However, given that China will eventually take over if nothing is done, I see no other option. The US will have to take action at some point if they wish to remain the no 1 superpower. Also consider that if China is not stopped and they become stronger than the US militarily, they will certainly use their muscle to further suppress their natural enemy.

    I see no other alternative. I believe the US will at some point in my lifetime wage war against China’s global interests and then wage war against China directly. History has never seen 2 superpowers exist peacefully side by side and it never will.
    It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. – Charles Darwin

  2. #2
    Email problem
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    US may have overextended. But it has bases there and support etc...

    The problem is China essentially claimed overstepped itself on every country it borders and to some extent even those it does not.

    It claimed parts of the Phillipines, areas close to Malaysia, and overlapping areas elsewhere.
    Vietnam(60s-80s), Russia(60s), Korea(mountain), all have had incursions in the past or present claims.
    China essentially claimed sea zones hundreds of miles away from itself which are far closer to countries that actually operate within them.

    Operationally in Asia, China lost the coalition prerogative it upset every neighbor effectively by trying to leverage its' size which turned USA into a guarantor, "see what happens when we leave" almost.

    Before WW2 Japan had some money in US obligations, they were frozen and cancelled. What you think of as a credit line is a debt, if hostilities break out the US has no obligation to pay it back it becomes null and void. It is not a default it is an abrogation because the circumstances dictate it.
    {default implies you didn't pay what you obligated to}
    China would be harmed far more if hostilities happened because it could loose access to not just the US market but Europe since the latter could simply do so for 'humanitarian' reasons, and to protect its market.

  3. #3
    Platinum Member pmbguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    PMB
    Posts
    2,094
    Thanks
    310
    Thanked 254 Times in 230 Posts
    Obviously if war broke out the US wont need to pay them back.

    So what do you think then? Will the US act against China militarily or will they do nothing?
    It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. – Charles Darwin

  4. #4
    Diamond Member adrianh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    5,089
    Thanks
    336
    Thanked 808 Times in 642 Posts
    China is taking back the world from MacDonald's and Coca Cola. America is simply too pre-occupied to realize this. Before long there will be a ChingLing Burgers in each and every city in the world and each and every person will be driving a GWM pickup. We are all already totally dependent on Chinese manufacturing. If China were to pull the plug on the production of US products then the US will sink like a stone. It is going to happen, do you think the Chinese are manufacturing anything and everything simply because they've got nothing better to do, do you think that they are moving the world's manufacturing over to themselves for no reason, think again. They are not only making the US wholly dependent on them, they are making the entire world dependent on them.
    How easily someone is offended is directly proportional to how stupid they are.
    ~GS Elevator

  5. #5
    Diamond Member wynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    east london
    Posts
    3,338
    Thanks
    548
    Thanked 624 Times in 523 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianh View Post
    They are not only making the US wholly dependent on them, they are making the entire world dependent on them.
    But they are not making themselves into a world bread basket. the US has that pretty sewn up.
    Bow too low to China and starve, who do you think the rest of the world will listen to in the end, the country with the 'Gew Gaws' and trinkets or the country with the bread and rice?
    "Nobody who has succeeded has not failed along the way"
    Arianna Huffington

    Read the first 10% of my books "Didymus" and "The BEAST of BIKO BRIDGE" for free
    You can also read and download 100% free my short stories "A Real Surprise" and "Pieces of Eight" at
    http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/332256

  6. #6
    Diamond Member adrianh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    5,089
    Thanks
    336
    Thanked 808 Times in 642 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by wynn View Post
    But they are not making themselves into a world bread basket. the US has that pretty sewn up.
    Bow too low to China and starve, who do you think the rest of the world will listen to in the end, the country with the 'Gew Gaws' and trinkets or the country with the bread and rice?
    They don't need to make themselves the worlds bread basket, they are like ants, they move into other lands and live off they baskets!
    How easily someone is offended is directly proportional to how stupid they are.
    ~GS Elevator

  7. #7
    Site Caretaker Dave A's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    20,981
    Thanks
    3,056
    Thanked 2,463 Times in 2,068 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Is a manufacturer dependant on its customers, or the customers dependant on the manufacturer?
    The trouble with opportunity is it normally comes dressed up as work.

  8. #8
    Diamond Member Justloadit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    2,671
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 544 Times in 460 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave A View Post
    Is a manufacturer dependant on its customers, or the customers dependant on the manufacturer?
    Logically, manufacturers are dependant on customers, however by changing the rules, it can revert.
    This is what China is good at, they come in, make cheap stuff, and over a short period of time disrupt the local manufacturing, so that the good local manufacturers go out of business due to no sales. The situation now arises that the customers become dependant on the Chinese manufacturers, as there is no other manufacturer to compete.
    Victor - Knowledge is a blessing or a curse, your current circumstances make you decide!
    Solar and LED lighting solutions - www.microsolve.co.za

  9. #9
    Platinum Member pmbguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    PMB
    Posts
    2,094
    Thanks
    310
    Thanked 254 Times in 230 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave A View Post
    Is a manufacturer dependant on its customers, or the customers dependant on the manufacturer?
    Very true, China is currently wholly dependant on the US its their biggest market. Economically China has more to lose by not trading with the US than the US. But its a big world China could in all probability replace its income from US (+Europe) trade by trading with the rest of the world, which they are, at an ever increasing rate. At some point they could, for the sake of global dominance, forgo all trade with the US to wage war.

    I said before that there will be war between the two nations, first there will be a war against each other’s interests through their “pawn” states, proxy wars. I then said that eventually they will wage war against each other directly. However I am starting to doubt that they will ever do this, given the fact that this will insure mutual nuclear destruction.

    My conclusion is then that there will be many proxy wars between the two nations. Fighting against each other but not directly. Similar to the cold war but with perhaps more intensity. In some respects this is already going on, Syria, Egypt, Libya.
    I then foresee a similar political situation as the cold war between the USSR and the US. Where a war of nutrition would be fought, by-proxy as it were. Where in the end one nation will collapse and one will be the victor. When the USSR knew they were losing the cold war they still did not use their nuclear armament, they knew it would mean mutual destruction. I think that the US and China will also not use their nuclear weapons against each other even when one of them knows that it will lose the cold war.

    So there will be a war, a Cold War
    It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. – Charles Darwin

  10. #10
    Silver Member Trickzta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    East Rand
    Posts
    462
    Thanks
    217
    Thanked 47 Times in 41 Posts
    But seriously folks, any big battle would, as has been mentioned, result in nuclear obliteration for all/most life on the planet. Here's a different take on the Chinese-American situation.

    The US Empire is not the Money Power.
    China's rise and opposition to the US fits the familiar pattern:
    the Money Power's proxies working towards managed conflict and World Government.

    To many it is unclear whether China is incorporated in the New World Order or a real competitor to Anglo-American Imperialism.

    There is little doubt that the Money Power co-opted the leadership of the Land of the Dragon a long time ago. History shows that the Money Power has several tools to motivate peoples in the right direction.

    Their fingerprints are all over China.

    In his excellent analysis of the power brokers in China, St. John Bartholomew reminds us that Marxism is a Money Power operation and that Mao did their bidding. Mao was apparently educated at Yale's department in China. Yale's Skull and Bones were very active in Asia and Mao was probably a member.

    Most American diplomats sent to him were so too.

    According to Bartholomew, the triads, China's mafia-style secret societies, were built up by Masons to combat the Qing dynasty that ruled China until the 19th century and resisted the Opium the British needed to sell to China because they had nothing else to exchange for its vast riches.

    The membership list of the Trilateral Commission, the Rockefeller confab similar to the Atlantic Bilderbergers, is littered with Chinese names.

    China's rise and opposition to the US fits the familiar pattern: the Money Power's proxies working towards managed conflict and World Government.

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/so...pol_nwo145.htm

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is China the new colonialist?
    By duncan drennan in forum General Business Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 16-May-07, 08:16 AM

Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.

Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •