China – US Naval Conflict

[Akasa]

Major? What does that mean?

What it means is that the Middle East stops exporting oil to the US, the US economy would slow down to an unacceptable pace. The US military won't be able to stand that. Fuel shortage will then undermine the US naval force.

If? Perhaps in Mandarin or other dialects in China that 'if' equals to certainty. But not in English. China does not have the clout to convince Saudi Arabia and/or Iraq to stop export. Mexico's internal problems with the drug cartels to bother with China. Venezuela needs US dollars more than China could convince Chavez that China can make up for the lack thereof. Russia would love to have China knock down a notch or two in an armed conflict against the US and would sell Russian oil to US at discount. Whoever is China's allies, money will come before any perceived shared moralities, that means quid pro quo before they will agree NOT to sell to the US what they buy from others so they can resell those oil to the US. Can China militarily strong arm those countries enough so they will not resell oil to the US? Does the PLAN have enough ships to impose a naval blockade around the US to prevent foreign oil tankers from US docks?

China has closer ties to the Middle East than you think. If the US is to openly attack China, then the Middle East would be faced with the decision to either support a country that is belligerent towards the Middle East and their ally China (and has a military presence there), or support a country that currently has no military presence anywhere. It's obvious which side the Middle East will choose.

Venezuela doesn't have any good ties with the US. China also has a growing need for oil and I don't see why the Venezuela won't simply turn to their closer ally.

If you are saying that money comes before friendship for countries, then China could simply cut a few trade ties with the US and the war would end without any loss of life.

China doesn't need a blockade. China currently sells weapons to Sudan in exchange for oil. Other countries can simply strike a deal with China. After all, China has never launched a military invasion of the Middle East.

The current reality is that the DF-21 is in development, not deployed. Yeahhh...You can prattle on about how secretive is China about weapons development but everyone will see that as nothing more than tap-dancing around the uncomfortable truth that you have nothing as far as the DF-21 goes. This has been debated and its claims have been sufficiently disputed here many times -- by me.

DF-21D has been deployed since 2009. It was first tested in 2005.

 

[gambit]

What it means is that the Middle East stops exporting oil to the US, the US economy would slow down to an unacceptable pace. The US military won't be able to stand that. Fuel shortage will then undermine the US naval force.

Har...What it means is that in order to stop US, the ME would have to stop selling oil, not just to the US but to the rest of the world. And that is not going to happen. I lived through the so called 'oil embargo' of the mid 1970s. You were not even a gleam in your father's eyes back then. The Saudi reduced, not stop, their oil export to US by only %5. Despite the long gas lines in the US, which was a knee-jerk reaction to a perceived long term 'embargo', the US was never in danger of running out of oil. The 'embargo' lasted from Oct 1973 to Mar 1974. Parts of oil producing Canada made a lot of money. The US, Asia, and Europe began programs of conservation and efficiency reforms. In hindsight, the OPEC members who were participants of that 'embargo' admitted that the revenue lost was not worth it. By the mid 1980s, non-OPEC oil producers were outpacing OPEC ones and OPEC never recovered the petroleum based influence they had before. China can convince the ME to embargo the world? You are dreaming.

China has closer ties to the Middle East than you think.

China's close ties to the ME is more imaginary than real.

If the US is to openly attack China, then the Middle East would be faced with the decision to either support a country that is belligerent towards the Middle East and their ally China (and has a military presence there), or support a country that currently has no military presence anywhere. It's obvious which side the Middle East will choose.

NATO was a necessity because of the Soviet threat. Before there could be a NATO-like entity among China and the ME members, China would have to convince enough of them that there is a common threat to the entire region. Perhaps you have heard of US involvements in Afghanistan and Iraq? May be Wikileaks on how the ME, lead by the Saudis, are more concerned with Iran than of US? So where is this NATO-like military and security oriented organization among China and the ME powers to the exclusion of everyone else? Dream on.

Venezuela doesn't have any good ties with the US. China also has a growing need for oil and I don't see why the Venezuela won't simply turn to their closer ally.

If you are saying that money comes before friendship for countries, then China could simply cut a few trade ties with the US and the war would end without any loss of life.

China doesn't need a blockade. China currently sells weapons to Sudan in exchange for oil. Other countries can simply strike a deal with China. After all, China has never launched a military invasion of the Middle East.

Right...So now the dream is that some Central and South American countries and some ME ones are going to come to China's aid in Asia......To fight US. They are going to sacrifice their blood just so China can gain supremacy in Asia. Iran, Syria, and Libya are going send navies and armies to support China just because China never invaded anyone in the ME...??? You are more delusional than I thought.

DF-21D has been deployed since 2009. It was first tested in 2005.

Sure...

 

[chinapakistan]

Even with my poor english reading ability I can understand this topic is about China and US, why some indian members alway bring india to every thread? Is it because talking big on this forum can make a country strong?

 

[spin666]

I never understand ppl's need to dream about a war that couldn't happen.
1.IF there is a war. It's the game ovar for everybody!
2.IF there is a dispute of some kind,which had some small local fighting,then the leaders would talk out of it,because both side know that other choose is really not a choose.
3.which bring us back to the point that there is no way that war would start between China and US.

 

[CardSharp]

Major? What does that mean?

Thanks for the graph Gambit I know how I am voting when they call the election!

 

[Akasa]

Har...What it means is that in order to stop US, the ME would have to stop selling oil, not just to the US but to the rest of the world. And that is not going to happen. I lived through the so called 'oil embargo' of the mid 1970s. You were not even a gleam in your father's eyes back then. The Saudi reduced, not stop, their oil export to US by only %5. Despite the long gas lines in the US, which was a knee-jerk reaction to a perceived long term 'embargo', the US was never in danger of running out of oil. The 'embargo' lasted from Oct 1973 to Mar 1974. Parts of oil producing Canada made a lot of money. The US, Asia, and Europe began programs of conservation and efficiency reforms. In hindsight, the OPEC members who were participants of that 'embargo' admitted that the revenue lost was not worth it. By the mid 1980s, non-OPEC oil producers were outpacing OPEC ones and OPEC never recovered the petroleum based influence they had before. China can convince the ME to embargo the world? You are dreaming.


China's close ties to the ME is more imaginary than real.

Hahaha, you really think that the Middle East's oil is some kind of "choice" that the US can choose to have or choose not to ? Do you know why the US made the compromise to make friendly relations with the Saudi Arabian "regime"? Do you know why it was so important for the US to keep the terrorists at bay in Iraq? Do you know why the US hates the fact that it has to make "alliances" with oil-rich countries that have poor human rights records? The answer? OIL.

Buddy, the world doesn't need to cut all of its exports of oil to the US. Cutting off the Middle Eastern oil supply is enough to make such an impact on the US that American politics won't be able to handle it. Loss of profit? Hello? China has set its eyes on the Middle East for decades now. With current state of China's economy, I have no doubt that China can offer better deals on Middle Eastern oil.

If you really think that China has no influence over the Middle East, then you clearly don't understand politics' current state of affairs. If conflict is to break out, the Middle East would feel threatened, especially with US presence in Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern countries. Conflict would probably lead the US to poke its nose deeper into the Middle East in search for resources, which would spark massive protests in countries like Iran. Then they would be faced with a decision: (1) continue to fuel the source of the aggression, or (2) temporarily divert fuel trade and weaken the aggressor. I doubt they would choose the first choice.

NATO was a necessity because of the Soviet threat. Before there could be a NATO-like entity among China and the ME members, China would have to convince enough of them that there is a common threat to the entire region. Perhaps you have heard of US involvements in Afghanistan and Iraq? May be Wikileaks on how the ME, lead by the Saudis, are more concerned with Iran than of US? So where is this NATO-like military and security oriented organization among China and the ME powers to the exclusion of everyone else? Dream on.

NATO, once a necessity, is now viewed globally as a source of conflict (I may disagree, but hey, read some damn newspapers). China needs not to convince any of them. If conflict occurs, they would feel the need of more security themselves. Do you really think that countries like Russia would feel "safe" with an US carrier steaming in the region?

Saudi Arabia, if your reports are even accurate, is concerned about Iran because a US invasion of Iran would destabilize the region. Much like how China is concerned about North Korea right now. If conflict is to occur, the US is likely to search for oil in the Middle East, and if they feel threatened, the Saudis would simply valve down the pipelines so the aggressor won't have any resources to continue the war.

Perhaps you have heard about SCO? The US calls it the "NATO of the East", and it controls 25% of the world's landmass, including Russia's gas-rich Siberia region. Hey, by the way, the US also depends on Russia for natural gas (maybe I should explain the importance of natural gas to you?). China and Russia have leading roles in the SCO. Oh by the way, Afghanistan is also part of the SCO! So if the SCO is pitted against the US, there's going to be a big impact.

Right...So now the dream is that some Central and South American countries and some ME ones are going to come to China's aid in Asia......To fight US. They are going to sacrifice their blood just so China can gain supremacy in Asia. Iran, Syria, and Libya are going send navies and armies to support China just because China never invaded anyone in the ME...??? You are more delusional than I thought.

Come to China's aid? Seriously, are you that terrible at reading comprehension? I never said anything about "coming to China's aid". First of all, these countries have their own security to worry about, and if the US starts ending its military around, yes, they're gonna worry about it. If their security is threatened, their reflex action is going to cut supplies to the country's that doing the threatening. They will do it on their own behalf, not China's.

Sure...

You know, there's a quote that goes like this:

"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt"

So have a nice cruise

 

[gambit]

Hahaha, you really think that the Middle East's oil is some kind of "choice" that the US can choose to have or choose not to ? Do you know why the US made the compromise to make friendly relations with the Saudi Arabian "regime"? Do you know why it was so important for the US to keep the terrorists at bay in Iraq? Do you know why the US hates the fact that it has to make "alliances" with oil-rich countries that have poor human rights records? The answer? OIL.

No doubt that the US import a lot of oil from the ME, but look at the chart again -- closely. It is a matter of public record that Europe and Asia are far much more dependent upon ME oil than we are. Global economic stability is pragmatically more urgent than the odious relationships that we must maintain. I guess considering China's own sorry human rights records you have no problems with such alliances?

Buddy, the world doesn't need to cut all of its exports of oil to the US. Cutting off the Middle Eastern oil supply is enough to make such an impact on the US that American politics won't be able to handle it. Loss of profit? Hello? China has set its eyes on the Middle East for decades now. With current state of China's economy, I have no doubt that China can offer better deals on Middle Eastern oil.

Talk about delusions. If that is true, China would have used that leverage towards the Taiwan issue, the North Korea issue, the Dalai Lama issue, and many more. Buddy...The world is not so enamored of China as you have deluded yourself.

If you really think that China has no influence over the Middle East, then you clearly don't understand politics' current state of affairs. If conflict is to break out, the Middle East would feel threatened, especially with US presence in Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern countries. Conflict would probably lead the US to poke its nose deeper into the Middle East in search for resources, which would spark massive protests in countries like Iran. Then they would be faced with a decision: (1) continue to fuel the source of the aggression, or (2) temporarily divert fuel trade and weaken the aggressor. I doubt they would choose the first choice.

That is a good laugh considering that we overthrew two ME regimes under one President. And what did the rest do? Continued to sell more oil.

NATO, once a necessity, is now viewed globally as a source of conflict (I may disagree, but hey, read some damn newspapers). China needs not to convince any of them. If conflict occurs, they would feel the need of more security themselves. Do you really think that countries like Russia would feel "safe" with an US carrier steaming in the region?

There is NOTHING Russia can do about it. What are the Russians doing now with the USS George Washington battle group heading over that part of the world? Does it matter if it is off Korea or China?

Saudi Arabia, if your reports are even accurate, is concerned about Iran because a US invasion of Iran would destabilize the region. Much like how China is concerned about North Korea right now. If conflict is to occur, the US is likely to search for oil in the Middle East, and if they feel threatened, the Saudis would simply valve down the pipelines so the aggressor won't have any resources to continue the war.

Again...If what you deluded yourself about is true, that would have happened with Desert Storm. For the ME, your ego will have to be bruised but China means nothing to them as far as security goes. If China goes down in a shooting fight against US, they can still sell as much oil as they want to put out.

Perhaps you have heard about SCO? The US calls it the "NATO of the East", and it controls 25% of the world's landmass, including Russia's gas-rich Siberia region. Hey, by the way, the US also depends on Russia for natural gas (maybe I should explain the importance of natural gas to you?). China and Russia have leading roles in the SCO. Oh by the way, Afghanistan is also part of the SCO! So if the SCO is pitted against the US, there's going to be a big impact.

Egad...There goes that 'if' fantasy again. I guess it is true that in Mandarin, 'if' means certainty.

Come to China's aid? Seriously, are you that terrible at reading comprehension? I never said anything about "coming to China's aid". First of all, these countries have their own security to worry about, and if the US starts ending its military around, yes, they're gonna worry about it. If their security is threatened, their reflex action is going to cut supplies to the country's that doing the threatening. They will do it on their own behalf, not China's.

Of course you did...Here...

China has closer ties to the Middle East than you think. If the US is to openly attack China, then the Middle East would be faced with the decision to either support a country that is belligerent towards the Middle East and their ally China (and has a military presence there), or support a country that currently has no military presence anywhere. It's obvious which side the Middle East will choose.

You clearly stated so without using the exact words. If it is so 'obvious', where is your evidence? No wonder you are a joke even amongst your pals.

You know, there's a quote that goes like this:

"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt"

So have a nice cruise

Correct...And it is YOU who are in the 'denial' river. The DF-21 has been debated to death and not a single Chinese member of this place have managed to adequately explain how it works. Sorry...But Photochop does not count any more than citing someone else's quotes.