Australian military fears over Timor link to China

[TorontoNoctis]

Russia, despite having been one of China's biggest military threats for the past three centuries it is currently in no shape to confront China. Neither nation, by itself, is strong enough to confront the U.S. by itself and the only way for both nations to maintain their spheres of influence is to join together in a somewhat reluctant pact. It is kind of like the pact between Liu Bei and Sun Quan before the Battle of the Red Cliffs. As long as the United States stays strong Russia and China won't turn on each other.

Why do you think that? Because Russia is poor? If Putin sent 2000 tanks into any nearby country, the US will be unable to do anything without escalating the war with tac nukes. With the cold war over, the USA has no reason to sacrifice New York or Los Angeles for anyone, least of all China. All they need is a really good excuse that sells in the media like the South Ossetian war. Russian military strength has historically been best when the country is politically stable (not necessarily rich) and Putin has a stranglehold on government so it is politically stronger than ever.

Besides at least Cao Cao lived on the same continent. The US economy could collapse at any moment again. Worrying about the US is like worrying about Rome sending a legion. Technically possible but ridiculously implausible.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Why do you think that? Because Russia is poor? If Putin sent 2000 tanks into any nearby country, the US will be unable to do anything without escalating the war with tac nukes. With the cold war over, the USA has no reason to sacrifice New York or Los Angeles for anyone, least of all China. All they need is a really good excuse that sells in the media like the South Ossetian war. Russian military strength has historically been best when the country is politically stable (not necessarily rich) and Putin has a stranglehold on government so it is politically stronger than ever.

Besides at least Cao Cao lived on the same continent. The US economy could collapse at any moment again. Worrying about the US is like worrying about Rome sending a legion. Technically possible but ridiculously implausible.

Ok let me clarify my points.

China is not Georgia. If Russia tried sending 2000 tanks into China total war would occur between the two powers and the United States would remain the absolute super power for the next century. For now Russia is being buffeted by NATO in the West and Japan and South Korea in the East. Does it really want turn against China so it'll be surrounded from all sides (much like what happened in the 1980s during the Sino-U.S. honey moon)? The Russians are not dumb!

Although the United States doesn't share its borders with China her power projection is unrivaled in East Asia. She has air fields in Japan, South Korea, and Guam and could also call upon the militaries of her numerous allies in times of need. At least Cao Cao and Sun Quan had the mighty Yangtze River separating their territories.

Lastly despite what everyone rants about all day and night the United States is going to be the dominant world power for at least the next three decades. China, despite her rapidly growing economy, still has to catchup with the States technologically and is suffering from braindrain to the U.S. as well. Most developed countries tend to ally with the United States as well.

 

[Nomenclature]

This is ironic considering that the CCP wants to rise via "soft power" but is still seen as a "hard power abuser" by the West. I think China will still be seen as a menace regardless of how much softpower it exerts since till now no superpower has achieved its status through peace. Whether the Chinese peaceful rise succeeds may determine the super power model for centuries to come.

How can China project soft power aboard when the Chinese themselves don't believe in it? One can hardly spend a day in China without enduring barrage after barrage of anti-Chinese tradition/culture/heritage propaganda.

Does an average Chinese on the street have any idea of his/her heritage? Absolutely no. Yet the leadership dare to daydream about Chinese soft-power aboard.

China can't be a soft superpower while having the communist party on top. Nobody believes in that anymore. China can't be a soft superpower if it becomes a liberal democracy either because the West invented it. China can't out-West the West and will become just another political copycat.

 

[lcloo]

How can China project soft power aboard when the Chinese themselves don't believe in it? One can hardly spend a day in China without enduring barrage after barrage of anti-Chinese tradition/culture/heritage propaganda.

Does an average Chinese on the street have any idea of his/her heritage? Absolutely no. Yet the leadership dare to daydream about Chinese soft-power aboard.

China can't be a soft superpower while having the communist party on top. Nobody believes in that anymore. China can't be a soft superpower if it becomes a liberal democracy either because the West invented it. China can't out-West the West and will become just another political copycat.

I am confused..... what does soft power have to do with traditional cultural heritage? Also why are the Chinese not aware of their heritage? I can not understand what you want to say.

 

[Nomenclature]

I am confused..... what does soft power have to do with traditional cultural heritage? Also why are the Chinese not aware of their heritage? I can not understand what you want to say.

Soft power ultimately is a form of public diplomacy centered around a country's value and image, which has everything to do with tradition and culture.

What I want to say is quite simple, a country can never command significant soft power without its own value, which must spring from its own tradition. And until China learns to respect its own culture, there's really little chance it can wield any significant soft power.

 

[siegecrossbow]

How can China project soft power aboard when the Chinese themselves don't believe in it? One can hardly spend a day in China without enduring barrage after barrage of anti-Chinese tradition/culture/heritage propaganda.

Does an average Chinese on the street have any idea of his/her heritage? Absolutely no. Yet the leadership dare to daydream about Chinese soft-power aboard.

China can't be a soft superpower while having the communist party on top. Nobody believes in that anymore. China can't be a soft superpower if it becomes a liberal democracy either because the West invented it. China can't out-West the West and will become just another political copycat.

I see where you are getting at, and I've been pondering this for sometime too.

Although China is a rising superpower, just what kind of a super power is it?

Both the Marxist philosophy and the Liberal Democracy advocated by the "Jing Ying" originated from the West. There is the notion of "Foreign products" are good and even worse, a prevalent thought, even amongst some "Fengqing", that Westerners are politer and "better people" than the Chinese.

I recall something similar happen in Japan a little over one hundred years ago. There was a movement to completely modernize Japan and help Japan "exit Asia and enter Europe". This is the reason why I believe that Japan wouldn't become a true super power had it succeeded after WWII. Despite the superficial "Samurai code" floating around in the military almost all aspects of the nation are Western. Japan, in effect, was absorbed by the Europeans culturally just as the Manchus were absorbed by the Chinese culturally.

Why couldn't China innovate and come up with a political system that truly suits the country's needs? We've achieved a Imperial form of the government that was the fairest in the world for the past 1400 years. We were responsible for the numerous technological and scientific breakthroughs that revolutionized how human beings lived and how wars are fought. Our philosophies, developed thousands of years ago, are still studied vigorously by scholars world wide. What happened to all of that?

Is China truly rising or have we been absorbed by the new sponge monster - Western culture?

 

[TorontoNoctis]

Ok let me clarify my points.

China is not Georgia. If Russia tried sending 2000 tanks into China total war would occur between the two powers and the United States would remain the absolute super power for the next century. For now Russia is being buffeted by NATO in the West and Japan and South Korea in the East. Does it really want turn against China so it'll be surrounded from all sides (much like what happened in the 1980s during the Sino-U.S. honey moon)? The Russians are not dumb!

Although the United States doesn't share its borders with China her power projection is unrivaled in East Asia. She has air fields in Japan, South Korea, and Guam and could also call upon the militaries of her numerous allies in times of need. At least Cao Cao and Sun Quan had the mighty Yangtze River separating their territories.

Lastly despite what everyone rants about all day and night the United States is going to be the dominant world power for at least the next three decades. China, despite her rapidly growing economy, still has to catchup with the States technologically and is suffering from braindrain to the U.S. as well. Most developed countries tend to ally with the United States as well.

The Russians are not dumb but neither are the Americans. Remember what context my reply was in: saying that the US was the greatest "threat" to China. So this is all a hypothetical game we are playing since war with Russia is unlikely but so is war with America.

Airpower cannot hold ground. No matter how powerful your air forces are, they cannot hold territory. This should have been proven in WWII when strategic bombing failed to bring the Axis powers to the negotiating table, and again in the Vietnam war, and yet again in the Gulf War where Saddam retained his political power despite no fly zones and decimation of his military. No matter how powerful your air forces, ground forces are required first to seize land and second to destroy the enemy's ability to wage war.

So no matter how many carrier battle groups the Americans have you won't convince me they are a greater threat than thousands of tanks. Consider that you need three carriers total for every carrier in the field: one for training, one for deployment and one for refit. So in the end America's conventional power projection ability is grossly exaggerated, and not a threat to any nation with > 200 4th generation aircraft. Two thousand tanks is in fact a conservative estimate -- the Russians could field five thousand tanks in any real war. And these would not be the Iraq types with steel shells, poor training and poor maintainence. They would be depleted uranium penetrators with ERA bricks, active protection and anti-tank and even anti-air missiles.

As far as I'm concerned the twenty year "Treaty of Goodwill and Friendship" is a scam by Putin to buy time to build up his conventional forces. Why twenty and not thirty or fifty? Why did Russia give up land when Putin is a hardcore nationalist? Because he knows by 2020 Russia will be a superpower again but he needs to buy time. The Treaty of "Friendship" (lol) is halfway through. I would stop worrying about the Americans and start worrying about traditional Chinese enemies. Ten years is not a lot of time.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The Russians are not dumb but neither are the Americans. Remember what context my reply was in: saying that the US was the greatest "threat" to China. So this is all a hypothetical game we are playing since war with Russia is unlikely but so is war with America.

Airpower cannot hold ground. No matter how powerful your air forces are, they cannot hold territory. This should have been proven in WWII when strategic bombing failed to bring the Axis powers to the negotiating table, and again in the Vietnam war, and yet again in the Gulf War where Saddam retained his political power despite no fly zones and decimation of his military. No matter how powerful your air forces, ground forces are required first to seize land and second to destroy the enemy's ability to wage war.

So no matter how many carrier battle groups the Americans have you won't convince me they are a greater threat than thousands of tanks. Consider that you need three carriers total for every carrier in the field: one for training, one for deployment and one for refit. So in the end America's conventional power projection ability is grossly exaggerated, and not a threat to any nation with > 200 4th generation aircraft. Two thousand tanks is in fact a conservative estimate -- the Russians could field five thousand tanks in any real war. And these would not be the Iraq types with steel shells, poor training and poor maintainence. They would be depleted uranium penetrators with ERA bricks, active protection and anti-tank and even anti-air missiles.

As far as I'm concerned the twenty year "Treaty of Goodwill and Friendship" is a scam by Putin to buy time to build up his conventional forces. Why twenty and not thirty or fifty? Why did Russia give up land when Putin is a hardcore nationalist? Because he knows by 2020 Russia will be a superpower again but he needs to buy time. The Treaty of "Friendship" (lol) is halfway through. I would stop worrying about the Americans and start worrying about traditional Chinese enemies. Ten years is not a lot of time.

I believe your concept of warfare is a little outdated.

The days of massive tank formations directly confronting one another is over. No nation would be foolish enough to launch a full scale invasion against China culminating in the occupation of Chinese soil. The Soviets tried a small scale version of that at Zhenbao Island and things didn't exactly go well for them despite the fact that it occured during the Cultural Revolutions. Imagine how it will go for the Russians today.

I think besides underestimating America you are also overestimating Russia. Following the "lost decade" Putin and his brilliant policies were the only things holding the nation together. Corruption was rampant within the government and various tycoons fattening off natural resources, along with Mafia and racial supremacists, plagued the nation. Russia, unlike China, was hit just as bad by the recent recession as Europe and the United States. Also keep in mind that they have Chechen and a rapidly Westernizing Eastern Europe to deal with. Do you seriously think that they have the resources for ambitions in the Far East?

Air power, since the Korean Wars, has been the greatest threat to the Chinese mainland. There is a reason that China decided to invest so heavily in anti-air and recently, her own air force. Although a full scale land invasion of China is very unlikely, a punitive strike against major urban centers like Beijing and Shanghai is more likely due to the proximity of U.S. air bases to China. Unlike Russia the United States is the sole dominant power in the world and despite getting tangled in Afghanistan (troops are getting out of Iraq), she is fully capable of defending and expanding her influence in East and South East Asia.

 

[topjumper]

Wow, let's not get too worked up on this, both Russia and US are great powers and either is capable of inflating heavy damages to China under a hypothetical scenario, let's not get into this "whose gun is bigger" debate again.

 

[below_freezing]

I see where you are getting at, and I've been pondering this for sometime too.

Although China is a rising superpower, just what kind of a super power is it?

Both the Marxist philosophy and the Liberal Democracy advocated by the "Jing Ying" originated from the West. There is the notion of "Foreign products" are good and even worse, a prevalent thought, even amongst some "Fengqing", that Westerners are politer and "better people" than the Chinese.

I recall something similar happen in Japan a little over one hundred years ago. There was a movement to completely modernize Japan and help Japan "exit Asia and enter Europe". This is the reason why I believe that Japan wouldn't become a true super power had it succeeded after WWII. Despite the superficial "Samurai code" floating around in the military almost all aspects of the nation are Western. Japan, in effect, was absorbed by the Europeans culturally just as the Manchus were absorbed by the Chinese culturally.

Why couldn't China innovate and come up with a political system that truly suits the country's needs? We've achieved a Imperial form of the government that was the fairest in the world for the past 1400 years. We were responsible for the numerous technological and scientific breakthroughs that revolutionized how human beings lived and how wars are fought. Our philosophies, developed thousands of years ago, are still studied vigorously by scholars world wide. What happened to all of that?

Is China truly rising or have we been absorbed by the new sponge monster - Western culture?

this is especially true in shanghai. my own cousin who lived there for 10 years refered to the city center as being "more cultured" because "more foreigners live there". also refered to us as "you outside folk" (i am on a work computer)

 

[oceanx]

this is especially true in shanghai. my own cousin who lived there for 10 years refered to the city center as being "more cultured" because "more foreigners live there". also refered to us as "you outside folk" (i am on a work computer)

First of all stop casting "aspersions" (as our Indian friends are fond of saying), even obliquely against the good folks of Shanghai ...

There should be a law against this.

Perhaps your cousin meant to say more "flavoured" ...

Now what culture was there in Wuhan?

And what culture was there in the country side? If it wasn't for some "interested foreigners" and "learned Chinese", peasants would have ground up all the oracle bones into "medicine" to this day.

Anyways, I am exiting my tripping mode ...

 

[oceanx]

... We've achieved a Imperial form of the government that was the fairest in the world for the past 1400 years. We were responsible for the numerous technological and scientific breakthroughs that revolutionized how human beings lived and how wars are fought. Our philosophies, developed thousands of years ago, are still studied vigorously by scholars world wide. What happened to all of that?

The point of your original post is taken. However, let's not go overboard. It's beyond a simple stretch to call the Imperial government "the fairest in the world over the past 1400 years".

Without being condescending, how well have you studied the "Imperial histories"? I have not studied it to the kind of detail that gives my confidence, and that's why I am asking.

 

[below_freezing]

First of all stop casting "aspersions" (as our Indian friends are fond of saying), even obliquely against the good folks of Shanghai ...

There should be a law against this.

Perhaps your cousin meant to say more "flavoured" ...

Now what culture was there in Wuhan?

And what culture was there in the country side? If it wasn't for some "interested foreigners" and "learned Chinese", peasants would have ground up all the oracle bones into "medicine" to this day.

Anyways, I am exiting my tripping mode ...

i could ask, what is culture, and how do you distinguish someone who is "cultured" with someone who is "not" and even if someone has "culture", does that make a place have culture? and is there a logical relationship between foreignness and being cultured? if so, then new mexico is the most cultured place on earth since 90% of the population are "foreigners" to the host country.

 

[oceanx]

...

Japan (neutered by two nukes) and Korea (Christinian fanatics burning down their own Buddhist temple in favor of a colonialist religion ) are pretty much dogs of the Western countries.

...

What the h*ll is this over-the-top fake nativist 民粹 garbage? While I in way condone fanaticism that destroys cultural inheritances, but how about a little perspective? Or common sense?

Was Buddhism not an "import" to East Asia, Mr. president wannabe of Asian American Tea Party? Was the Vedic Hindusim of yore not a heavily "import-flavoured" brand originating from West Asia?

Not that I particularly want to debate these points here. But I will if you open up a thread.

You are on imbecilic grounds by calling the Christian faith a "colonialist religion" ...

Granted, I trash-talk as frequently as any here. But yours takes the cake.

 

[TorontoNoctis]

I believe your concept of warfare is a little outdated.

No, my notion of warfare is not outdated. It is forward thinking, for many reasons.

Let's talk about the technological reasons. First, PAK FA. Russia will make 200 for itself and India, and 600 for export. You say that mass tank battles will not occur anymore due to air superiority. When stealth fighters become the norm and every third world nation can field 50 PAK FA's (a quarter of America's F-22 power) suddenly air superiority is difficult or impossible making tank warfare primary again. Without air superiority, tank killers like Apache and A-10 will find it difficult to operate. The same goes for any dedicated tank killer. Second, tanks will soon all have active protection against anti-tank missiles and RPGs in Shtora and Arena and similar systems. The power of an infanteer to destroy a tank with a Javelin or RPG-29 will be neutered. Third are datalinks and so-called network-centric warfare. Eventually tanks and aircraft may be unmanned removing part of the horror of war and encouraging brush fights to test technology.

Finally, the "political" reasons. I quote political because they are not really political as in based on fears of encirclement or superpowers, but resource wars. Oil, clean water and even airable land will be fought over. America tried and failed in Iraq, but that doesn't mean other nations won't when the problem becomes critical. War will become the way politicians distract citizens from serious internal problems, a way to unify the country. Now, in order to seize resources you must have land forces. You can't hold an oil pipeline with airplanes. So mass tank battles will happen. It is only a matter of time.

So my ideas are not "outdated" but perhaps early by 50 - 100 years. But whoever starts preparing for the eventual problems first will have a head start and more likely to be the victor. Nobody really knows when oil prices will skyrocket, or when certain environmental problems begin causing mass panics or deaths.