Has China been practicing preemptive missile strikes against U.S. bases?

[jhungary]

http://www.businessinsider.com/lead...inker-china-now-has-only-one-real-ally-2016-2

You tend to mistake trade relations with authentic alliances.

Chinese missiles are good but less capable than those of Russia and US on average.

Anyways, Trump administration has the guts to stand-up to China, should a situation demand it. Don't expect every American President to be spineless like Barack Obama.

You make it sound like as if China is a godly entity. It is just a country with strengths and weaknesses. And Americans fully understand those weaknesses.

Missile technology is not a wonder weapon, I have called in dozen of missile strike both from fast air and ground support, these people do not know that missile is a point to point weapon, in a case of war, it means as a supportive weapon, not a main showdown weapon.

They are thinking, one missile can destroy one base, one missile can destroy one carrier, but in reality is it is this easy? US have been fighting ground and air war since 1940, if it is really that easy to win a war just by lobbing missiles, the US would have done so in every war since the 1950s, but those of us who actually stared down the barrel of a grifle and been in a receving end of an artillery and mortar strike knows this is just a thing, it may help you win a battle, it may not. For these people, they either willingly buy into this BS or if not, then they are basically trolling you.

To these people, they don't know nor care about the truth on anything. They just cheer for the sake of cheering. My suggestion is that, you should not waste your time on the uninformed and mentally/phychologically impaired member on this forum.

 

[LeGenD]

When you edit your post and don't want to keep on the conversation there's nothing left but using verbal attack to make China as the aggressor. Everybody knows who the real aggressor is and China will respond if US cross the red line MARK MY WORDS

Why is editing such an issue for you? I tend to edit my posts to my liking. This has nothing to do with your responses.

My core argument is in front of you. I have nothing to hide in that.

You want a conversation with me AFTER

1. Creating fuss over a minor edit
2. Labelling me a US ball licker
3. Misrepresenting my argument

????

I won't bother. That post is not directed towards you in the first place.

As far as 'aggressor' aspect is concerned; China has fought a war with US, India and Vietnam. China has warned Taiwan to not declare independence. Heck, China has territorial disputes in SCS with several of its neighbors. Pretty aggressive.

I don't think US and China have the moral right to accuse each other for being an aggressor.

 

[Oldman1]

China is not stupid to do something like that. This is more of counterattack if possible war with the U.S. and allies erupted. China does not want to do something Japan did.

 

[GumNaam]

I wouldn't be surprised if China is in fact practicing pre-emptive strikes against u.s. bases. And frankly I don't blame them either, it's their God given right to defend themselves against known colonial powers that were sabre-rattling all over the place. bush junior and obama (and now trump) should've thought real long and hard before they globe trotted around the world sabre-rattling their strength to strike anyone whenever they wanted; they have awakened the red dragon that has an industrial capacity that far out matches the u.s. and europe combined!

 

[TaiShang]

China is a rational actor, as has been proven countless times. It does not tend to resort to rush and irrational act without due calculations.

However, I cannot say the same thing for the US. Especially under Trump who surrounded himself with a bunch of neo-fascists, racists, religious zealots and irrational lunatics, the US regime is explosive.

Surely, if the US committed some irrational act of aggression against China's existential interests, China would be in cold blood setting out to annihilate US demographic and material assets.

The matter now is whether the sane rest of the world will manage to contain an irrational and neo-fascist leaning government of US from a Hitler-like act of aggression and self-destruction.

 

[TaiShang]

Irrational and unpredictable US regime has in fact been causing concerns among traditional US allies.

It would only be normal that China would take measures to materially and demographically obliterate the US in case the neo-fascist Trump administration engaged in some act of aggression reminiscent of the fascist Japan or Germany pre-WW2.

***

ECB rejects US accusation of currency manipulating
Xinhua, February 7, 2017

European Central Bank (ECB) President Mario Draghi on Monday rejected Washington's accusation of currency manipulating.

"We are not currency manipulators," said Draghi at the European Parliament's economic and monetary affairs committee.

The remarks came after Peter Navarro, head of the U.S. National Trade Council, reportedly said the euro was like an "implicit Deutsche Mark" whose low valuation gave Germany an advantage over its main partners.

Navarro, as well, said Germany used a "grossly undervalued" euro to exploit the United States and its European Union (EU) partners.

The ECB president said the EU's monetary policies reflected the diverse state of the economic cycle of the eurozone and the United States.

"The single market would not survive with continuous competitive devaluations," the president told parliamentarians.

Draghi also slammed U.S. President Donald Trump's policy of loosening bank regulations which were introduced after the 2008 financial crisis, saying Washington's idea was "very worrisome."

He said financial regulations and legislative actions taken in the aftermath of the financial crisis helped curb the development of significant financial stability risk.

"The last thing we need at this point is a relaxation of regulation," Draghi said.

Trump last week signed an executive order to overhaul the country's financial regulatory system, including scaling back the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act that was introduced after the financial crisis and imposed strict capital standards on banks.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

My point is that unless China does something irrational to provoke American military response, it won't come. Now, this doesn't implies that China is willing to be irrational to that extent.

Try to understand the argument.

Hmm have you been reading the international news at all for the past 2 weeks?

There is one world leader who is causing panic worldwide (especially among US allies) for being irrational and unstable.

And it's not Xi Jinping.

 

[xunzi]

Oh Dear! You have major comprehension problems. Fix them first before participating in conversations here.

Meaning of word IF for starters:

1. Introducing a conditional clause
2. A condition or supposition

And mind your tone and language.

You got owned, bro. Admit and accept and move on. LOL

Honestly, your logic is rather stupid. If you ask the world community who are likely to provoke or start a war, given the history, I say US lead by a large margin and China is arguably the least aggressive country in the past 100 years. With that logic, it's safe to say whoever start first is going to look stupid and that bet fall on the US given the recent history of aggression.

 

[Pangu]

Bro,

You are not rational in your assessment of diplomatic matters and conflict. US will stand-up to China should a situation demand it. Understand the bold part? Let me make this simple for you: If China does something stupid or irrational like invading Taiwan or attacking American assets in the region.

Now, what kind of response it would be? American strategic planners are likely to determine that, according to the situation.

Retaking Taiwan is not something stupid, it is not only national goal, nested not only in the top echelons of the govt., but also an undeniable duty burned in the very psyche of the common people. When will it happen, & how will it happen will be determined by cross-strait relationship. I suggest you do not comment on things you do not understand.

 

[TaiShang]

Never bet on an attentions seeker that will kept his words to step down from his show, PHD my a@s LOL
Perhaps the so-called professional has been missing his "abusive" privilege too much that he used to enjoy here
However it will be best for him to realize those good old days has long gone period

Who would take seriously an argument made by an anonymous person as being this or that?

Only the person who makes that claim.

It is refreshing that this section is now properly moderated and hate-filled actions won't be tolerated.

Retaking Taiwan is not something stupid, it is not only national goal, nested not only in the top echelons of the govt., but also an undeniable duty burned in the very psyche of the common people. When will it happen, & how will it happen will be determined by cross-strait relationship. I suggest you do not comment on things you do not understand.

It is written in the Constitution, as well. Considering national unification as a form of aggression is as ahistorical as arguing that the US should let Texas go independent, or join Mexico.

In fact, the latter argument holds much water.

Nevertheless, it is a fact that the Trump government is being perceived as unpredictable, aggressive, and leaning to fascism. It is not only credible US competitors such as Russia and China, traditional US allies like Germany, France, UK, Mexico and even Japan see the US as being in a state of irrationality, hatefulness and mad dog-ness.

China, on the other hand, is the historical antidote to heal or put down a mad dog.

In any case, a self-professed mad dog cannot even come close endangering China's vital interests.

 

[LeGenD]

You got owned, bro. Admit and accept and move on. LOL

Honestly, your logic is rather stupid. If you ask the world community who are likely to provoke or start a war, given the history, I say US lead by a large margin and China is arguably the least aggressive country in the past 100 years. With that logic, it's safe to say whoever start first is going to look stupid and that bet fall on the US given the recent history of aggression.

Owned? My point was not even directed towards the member who supposedly owned me for it. It was directed towards another member and I believe he understood it. That is all.

Now, you are taking a supposition at face value. I believe that China wants to work with US and does not desires a confrontation. I am willing to entertain the notion that China would like to settle its dispute with any state with diplomacy. However, this revelation:

Ideals are peaceful. History is violent.

Really nails it.

China does have history of violence in pursuit of its interests in the past and this will remain a possibility in the future. Same is true for US. Nobody is saint in this matter.

Heck, take a look at Chinese political history. Mao Zedong anyone?

As far as rationality is concerned, remember the incident of capturing an American drone near Philipines? One would expect something like that from Americans but not anymore.

Regardless, I am an advocate of peace and prosperity and I wish you guys good fortune in your relations with Americans.

More importantly, some Chinese should try to understand the purpose of an argument and for whom it is directed towards in order to avoid discord. Every point doesn't have to be filled with praise for China. Some points are simply what if conjectures with a specific intent.

 

[LeGenD]

Educate yourself before you run your mouth, white boy. Think our false flagging bs fools anybody?

search "quora Why-do-the-Chinese-view-Mao-Zedong-in-such-a-positive-light answers 20833048"

Speaking of history of violence...

So I am a white boy now? You are not the first one to accuse me of being a false flagger and you won't be the last. Good luck in proving that.

Every state has a narrative and justification for the acts of aggression on its part. Consider an example: Syria, US, Russia, Iran, Pakistan, Israel......any other. One needs to look beyond the lens of hypernationalism to acknowledge the capacity of his state of being the aggressor under a set of circumstances. Every state has that tendency but few have the capability.

I am sure even Hitler had justifications for his deeds when he was in power. You will be surprised how many in the WEST and even Pakistan don't perceive him a monster he is made out to be. But victor rewrites history.

 

[xunzi]

Owned? My point was not even directed towards the member who supposedly owned me for it. It was directed towards another member and I believe he understood it. That is all.

Now, you are taking a supposition at face value. I believe that China wants to work with US and does not desires a confrontation. I am willing to entertain the notion that China would like to settle its dispute with any state with diplomacy. However, this revelation:

Ideals are peaceful. History is violent.

Really nails it.

China does have history of violence in pursuit of its interests in the past and this will remain a possibility in the future. Same is true for US. Nobody is saint in this matter.

Heck, take a look at Chinese political history. Mao Zedong anyone?

As far as rationality is concerned, remember the incident of capturing an American drone near Philipines? One would expect something like that from Americans but not anymore.

Regardless, I am an advocate of peace and prosperity and I wish you guys good fortune in your relations with Americans.

More importantly, some Chinese should try to understand the purpose of an argument and for whom it is directed towards in order to avoid discord. Every point doesn't have to be filled with praise for China. Some points are simply what if conjectures with a specific intent. I will praise China in a discussion intended exactly for that.

Yes owned because after he found a flaw, you quickly edit the post to hide your flaw argument. Also the fact your argument is rather weak. You can't compare China aggression with the US. There is no other that can rival them in the modern history.

You see, this where you run into trouble and make you look stupid when you mentioned Mao. Mao didn't start any war. His war is mostly internal struggle. Don't count his war of anti-imperalism against him. As far as our modern history is concerned, there are multiple occasions in which we can start a war but we didn't. Just take a look at Diaoyu, South China Sea. We are way more powerful than Phillipines, Vietnam, and even Japan but we never used force and start a war with them. We could have and kick them off those islands in SCS but we didn't. If this is the US, they would have cock the head of their South American neighbors for trying to wrestle territories with them. That, my friend, the difference between us and the US.

Now you brought up the drone incident and I don't know how that relevant to the discussion or how you equal that to aggression. It was an incident in which we felt the drone was used to spy on us and thus we captured it and investigated. Once it was showed to be a research and commercial drone, we returned it in a very professional manner.

Like I said, your argument is stupid and that logic will not fly if you are to compare the aggression of USA vs China. There is no comparison. The US have shown the determination to use force and they did used force as a coercion. I'm not asking you to praise us. You don't need to but you need to be objectively using your brain to think and make arguments, otherwise you will get owned by another person.

 

[gambit]

As far as our modern history is concerned, there are multiple occasions in which we can start a war but we didn't. Just take a look at Diaoyu, South China Sea. We are way more powerful than Phillipines, Vietnam, and even Japan but we never used force and start a war with them. We could have and kick them off those islands in SCS but we didn't. If this is the US, they would have cock the head of their South American neighbors for trying to wrestle territories with them. That, my friend, the difference between us and the US.

The reason why your China have not dared done anything beyond harassing fishermen is because your leadership knows the US will act -- after a certain threshold.

Do not mistake the policies of one US President administration to be inevitable lock down for the next. The difference between US and China, if perception is reality, is that the US is guarantor of the peace while China is not. All the graphics about how many US military adventures around the world means shit to Asia. All they care is what China want and what the US can do to deny that want.

 

[terranMarine]

The reason why your China have not dared done anything beyond harassing fishermen is because your leadership knows the US will act -- after a certain threshold.

Do not mistake the policies of one US President administration to be inevitable lock down for the next. The difference between US and China, if perception is reality, is that the US is guarantor of the peace while China is not. All the graphics about how many US military adventures around the world means shit to Asia. All they care is what China want and what the US can do to deny that want.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/america-war-93-time-222-239-years-since-1776.html

old man whom are you trying to fool?