What's new

U.S. War with China “Inevitable,” Author Glain Says

wmdisinfo

FULL MEMBER
Joined
May 15, 2011
Messages
633
Reaction score
0
Outside of the market madness, the biggest global news this week might be China sending its first aircraft carrier to sea.
The launch was not unexpected and China sought to downplay its significance, saying "it will not pose a threat to other countries."
Still, "it is the most potent symbol yet of China's desire to develop the power both to deny U.S. naval access to Asian waters and to protect its global economic interests, including shipping lanes," The WSJ reports.
Like many others, Stephen Glain, author of State vs. Defense, believes the U.S. and China are, indeed, on a collision course. "Absent a good faith attempt to negotiate this thicket of disputes between China and Taiwan and the Philippines and Brunei and others, I think it's inevitable," he says. "The Chinese are not going to back down."
Just as America adopted the Monroe Doctrine to project power in the Western Hemisphere, the Chinese believe they have a right to their own sphere of influence in the Asia-Pacific region. "China is after all a 3000-year old country; Asia has been throughout most of that history Sino-centric," he says.
But to those who believe the U.S. and its allies must "bottle up" China, Glain says "there's nothing in those 3000 years of Chinese history" to suggest China's intentions are to militarily dominate the region. "On the contrary, they've always remained close to their own territory," he notes. "They have always been the Middle Kingdom between heaven and earth."
However, Glain fears the U.S. and its allies might provoke China into a war that might otherwise be avoidable. "Arms races tend to develop their own immutable momentum," he says, noting the Pentagon is embarking on an "enormous military buildup" in the region.
In his new book, Glain laments the rise of the "military industrial complex" President Eisenhower warned about 50 years ago, suggesting defense contractors and their patrons in Congress and the Pentagon have an undue influence on U.S. foreign policy. American hubris is also playing a role in the march to war, he says.
"Without an admission by the U.S. of its limitations, both fiscal and militarily…I think some kind of conflict between the U.S. and China is inevitable, probably in our lifetime," he says.

U.S. War with China
 
.
It already happened in the 1950's Korean war. :azn:

Even back at one of the weakest points in China's history, we managed to push the USA and 16 of her allies completely out of North Korea.

China today, is too big to clash with directly. Any conflicts that occur, will happen via proxy wars.
 
. .
If the US goes to war with China the end result will be the undisputed end of the US as a nation state, but the status of China is questionable, depending on how permanently the US wants the "end" to be.
 
.
If the US goes to war with China the end result will be the undisputed end of the US as a nation state, but the status of China is questionable, depending on how permanently the US wants the "end" to be.

ATTACK ON CHINA MEANS ATTACK ON PAKISTAN.
 
.
If the US goes to war with China the end result will be the undisputed end of the US as a nation state, but the status of China is questionable, depending on how permanently the US wants the "end" to be.
Wrong...If there is war between US and China, it will be the end of China as the self appointed agent between the Heavens and Earth. China's military will be so crippled that it will not be able to keep the empire unified.
 
.
Wrong...If there is war between US and China, it will be the end of China as the self appointed agent between the Heavens and Earth. China's military will be so crippled that it will not be able to keep the empire unified.

Sir, I beg to differ here. I dont think it will be feasible for either US or China to fight in Chinese mainland. So IMHO either the war will be fought on Pakistani soil or in Myanmar or North Korea. Or the US will draw out the PLAN into the high seas where the US is more capable in a battle with its pacific fleet or draw the Chinese fleet to IOR. And I dont think the Chinese will take the trap...and they will counter you by provocation...this is going to go on and thus heralding a new cold war era.
 
.
Wrong...If there is war between US and China, it will be the end of China as the self appointed agent between the Heavens and Earth. China's military will be so crippled that it will not be able to keep the empire unified.

Gambit thinks mainland China is an evil empire. lol ^^
 
. . .
The first fixed wing aircraft took off from the flight deck of USS Birmingham in 1910 and the first landing took place in 1911. Exactly 100 years later a Chinese aircraft carrier is about to take to the seas and some one predicts an imminent war between the US and China while other highly knowledgable members of the forum wring their hands in glee at the imagined prospect of an American defeat in such a war. The US, UK and Japan had active carrier programmes by 1920. These three nations had substantial carrier fleets during WW II. While the Japanese lost their carriers at Midway, the US has been building and operating carriers for the last 100 years. China has yet some catching up to do.

With the addition of carriers and anti carrier ballistic missiles to their arsenal, China has put in place the building blocks of a strategy designed to deny access to US warships in the South and East China Seas. The US also is busy operationalising the AirSea Battle concept which is designed to deter just such a move by China. All said and done, neither event signifies the imminent outbreak of hostilities. The Cold war between the US and the USSR lasted nearly 5 decades without a shot being fired in anger and midst far greater provocations than China preventing the USN from entering its back yard.

”the Chinese believe they have a right to their own sphere of influence in the Asia-Pacific region. “
The right to an area of influence in the Asia Pacific does not imply the right to prevent international shipping (Naval or commercial) from traversing international waters. Isn’t the Panama Canal well within the US area of influence? Did that prevent the Admiral Chabanenko from transiting it in December 2008? Are Iran and Egypt the best of friends? Does that stop Iranian warships from the use of the Suez. The Chinese have to stop being insecure about US ships transiting international waters in the Western Pacific.

The Military Industrial complex that the author laments is not new to America, it existed even during President Eisenhower. In fact, Eisenhower was a victim of the Military Industrial complex, especially the cartel of massive industrial houses building missiles which accused him of permitting a missile gap vis –a – vis the USSR. America has lived with it for 60 years and it is a part of American way of life now and the ‘American way of War’ and the American Democracy. It is not a good thing as political systems go and it has the potential of subverting and manipulating democracy but is the Chinese version of totalitarianism any better?
 
. .
we should exploit the situation to get state of the art military equipments from USA it is very clear now that India and china cannot get along,we should join the USA camp as we already have very good relations with Israel and there lobby is strongest in USA hence there will be no opposition of arm sales to India !
 
. . .

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom