When will China's military be able to challenge the U.S.?

[CardSharp]

china is strong enough to challange US even today, US with new age hitec weapons sounds like an illiterate with a maxim gorky book, US made blunders in vietnam and are making blunders today in afghanistan

Don't under-estimate the US. The CCP never does.

 

[anon45]

Name one situation that the USA helped defuse instead of worsen.

I'll name 3

Pakistan-India tensions after mumbai bombings.

Possible continuation of hostilities between Russia and Georgia

Possible military action between Iran and Israel... so far.

The USA starts more WARS than it stops.

Whose to say the existence of a dominant power (in this case the US) alone doesn't prevent wars? There is no possible way your words could be proven as the existance of a dominant power itself could have a stabilizing effect.

The USA backing of Israel just made the conflict worse



The USA backing of Iraq led to the Iran Iraq wars.

You mean because Israel could actually defend itself? If Israel did not have the support of a power with influence in the region do you think the chances of hot conflict in the region, not the current low level insurgency would be greater or less?

So without US backing Iran and Iraq would not have gone to war?

Well that is beside the point because Iraq never had specific US backing, at least according to these sources Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

United States support for Iraq during the Iran?Iraq war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (under U.S. foreknowledge and reaction to the conflict on the paragraph starting with the words "Biographer Said K. Aburish"

Iran Chamber Society: History of Iran: The United States and Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988

These among others give some evidence (with admittedly varying degrees of authority) indicate that the US had very little to do with the beginning of hostilities. Saddam certainly had his own reasons and believed in his victory. Iraq also had bigger backers than the US in France and the Soviet Union. It should also be noted that Israel sold arms to Iran.

9/11 occurred because of USA involvment with Israel and USA occupation of Saudia Arabia and sanctions against Iraq.

It was USA involvment in middle eastern affairs that got it attacked and now it is engaged in two more wars and probably a 3rd on with iran.

China's involved with North Korea, **** I guess it would be justified if a radical South Korean unification group cracked open the Three Gorges Dam!

As for Saudi Arabia, Its not an occupation if you're there under the invitation of the government.

The Venezuela vs Colombia conflict was made WORSE by the USA. Relations between the two neighbors mostly deteriorated because Hugo Chavez a communist got elected and the USA pretty much bribed Colombia's neighbor into being a USA proxy and hosting USA military and CIA operations.

Look up Chavez support of FARC and the ELN and tell me that the US is the cause of the conflict.

Somalia is in a neverending state of civil war similar to Vietnam because the USA backs a bunch of corrupt warlords that 90% of the population of Somalia hates. Somalia has been in a neverending state of civil war since.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Somalia_(2006-present)

Looking at the source, claims of Ethiopian troops being US backed are apparently from Somalian islamists, there are more credible sources than that the state ethiopian troops are US backed. I assumed this from reading the name of the source, not the article of the source though, so this may be wrong.

That said,civil war and repression is unfortunately not new to Somalia, and certainly not US caused.

History of Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For US response to Somalia's anarchy look at our efforts to empower the TFG an internationally backed secular govt.

The thing about the USA, is that IT ONLY INTERFERES TO PROP UP THE LOSING SIDE (like in Vietnam), THUS MAKING A NEVER ENDING STRUGGLE

How come the USA doesn't intervene in Sudan?

The USA is NOT a peace keeping force. If it wasn't for the USA these conflicts would have ended LONG ago.

Caps- cruise control for cool

Wait, so this wasn't ever about starting more wars than preventing, but about prolonging wars through its support of the side that best fits its interests? **** the same accusation could be leveled at any any country or government, China is certainly no exception.

Afghanistan would be have been a short and bloodless conflict if only the Taliban had given up immediately and cooperated with us

If only the Chinese would accept Indian ideas of their border there would be no need to militarize it!

If only the Israeli's would accept that they must be pushed into the sea to give Palestinians back their stolen land!

If only the USSR and China had not supported North Vietnam things would have been a lot less bloody.

If only the Palestinians would accept that the Israeli state is there to stay, recognise it, and try to make peace within its current boundaries!

If only China had not supported North Korea the Korean peninsula would be whole and there would be no military tensions on the peninsula!

You and I both know things are more complicated then that.

The US is not a peacekeeping force by any means, but our country is inherently interested in keeping the world as stable and conducive to trade as possible. instability leads to uncertainty. violent instability potentially impacts trade, and war is incredibly difficult to control. Stability means less uncontrolled change. As the current top dog of the system, with alliances throughout the planet, a capitalist economy, and more importantly a consumer economy, we gain benefits from that stability and the freedom to trade throughout the world.

It is one of the ideas behind the UN, a forum to mediate disputes instead of fighting (the idea behind it at least, trust politicians to screw it up).

NATO is a more forceful response. Attack one of us and you attack all of us.

Of course this is just the general philosophy, individuals play a large role as well (ref Saddam).

If we had a more cautious president less eager to ride the wave of patriotism at the time of 9/11 and more critical of intelligence reports from allies perhaps we wouldn't have entered Iraq.

If Saddam was less confident of his ability to take on Iran as well as less ambition to be the head power of the Middle-East there would have been no Iran-Iraq war in favor of a sort of mini cold war?

 

[CardSharp]

You're worse than Gambit

 

[anon45]

You're worse than Gambit

I guess I should take that as a complement?

 

[CardSharp]

I guess I should take that as a complement?

Chinaowns is pretty much the exact caricature of what Americans think a brain-washed commie is. Anyone with any sense here has just learned to ignore him and his ridiculous comments.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Chinaowns is pretty much the exact caricature of what Americans think a brain-washed commie is. Anyone with any sense here has just learned to ignore him and his ridiculous comments.

You're right.

Just look at his name: "Chinaownseverything".

It's like a bad stereotype of what a Westerner might think a Chinese nationalist would act like.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

I'll name 3

Pakistan-India tensions after mumbai bombings.

Possible continuation of hostilities between Russia and Georgia

Possible military action between Iran and Israel... so far.

Whose to say the existence of a dominant power (in this case the US) alone doesn't prevent wars? There is no possible way your words could be proven as the existance of a dominant power itself could have a stabilizing effect.



You mean because Israel could actually defend itself? If Israel did not have the support of a power with influence in the region do you think the chances of hot conflict in the region, not the current low level insurgency would be greater or less?

So without US backing Iran and Iraq would not have gone to war?

Well that is beside the point because Iraq never had specific US backing, at least according to these sources Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

United States support for Iraq during the Iran?Iraq war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (under U.S. foreknowledge and reaction to the conflict on the paragraph starting with the words "Biographer Said K. Aburish"

Iran Chamber Society: History of Iran: The United States and Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988

These among others give some evidence (with admittedly varying degrees of authority) indicate that the US had very little to do with the beginning of hostilities. Saddam certainly had his own reasons and believed in his victory. Iraq also had bigger backers than the US in France and the Soviet Union. It should also be noted that Israel sold arms to Iran.



China's involved with North Korea, **** I guess it would be justified if a radical South Korean unification group cracked open the Three Gorges Dam!

As for Saudi Arabia, Its not an occupation if you're there under the invitation of the government.


Look up Chavez support of FARC and the ELN and tell me that the US is the cause of the conflict.




Looking at the source, claims of Ethiopian troops being US backed are apparently from Somalian islamists, there are more credible sources than that the state ethiopian troops are US backed. I assumed this from reading the name of the source, not the article of the source though, so this may be wrong.

That said,civil war and repression is unfortunately not new to Somalia, and certainly not US caused.

History of Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For US response to Somalia's anarchy look at our efforts to empower the TFG an internationally backed secular govt.



Caps- cruise control for cool

Wait, so this wasn't ever about starting more wars than preventing, but about prolonging wars through its support of the side that best fits its interests? **** the same accusation could be leveled at any any country or government, China is certainly no exception.

Afghanistan would be have been a short and bloodless conflict if only the Taliban had given up immediately and cooperated with us

If only the Chinese would accept Indian ideas of their border there would be no need to militarize it!

If only the Israeli's would accept that they must be pushed into the sea to give Palestinians back their stolen land!

If only the USSR and China had not supported North Vietnam things would have been a lot less bloody.

If only the Palestinians would accept that the Israeli state is there to stay, recognise it, and try to make peace within its current boundaries!

If only China had not supported North Korea the Korean peninsula would be whole and there would be no military tensions on the peninsula!

You and I both know things are more complicated then that.

The US is not a peacekeeping force by any means, but our country is inherently interested in keeping the world as stable and conducive to trade as possible. instability leads to uncertainty. violent instability potentially impacts trade, and war is incredibly difficult to control. Stability means less uncontrolled change. As the current top dog of the system, with alliances throughout the planet, a capitalist economy, and more importantly a consumer economy, we gain benefits from that stability and the freedom to trade throughout the world.

It is one of the ideas behind the UN, a forum to mediate dispute instead of fight.

Of course this is just the general philosophy, individuals play a large role as well (ref Saddam).

If we had a more cautious president less eager to ride the wave of patriotism at the time of 9/11 and more critical of intelligence reports from allies perhaps we wouldn't have entered Iraq.

If Saddam was less confident of his ability to take on Iran as well as less ambition to be the head power of the Middle-East there would have been no Iran-Iraq war in favor of a sort of mini cold war?

You don't seem to understand the concept of SOVERIGNITY of nations.

Who should decide the government of Korea?

The only people that should decide the government of Korea are the Korean people.

The USA had no right to send their soldiers to prop up their own regime.

In each of the civil wars Korea and Vietnam, USA was the one that started the conflict by sending their soldiers to prop up the losing side AGAINST the will of the people.

China only entered Korea after the USA infringed Korean soverignity.

The USA is guilty of escalation, China only entered as a counterbalance to USA aggression.

What China is against is IMPERIALISM, which is using military force to manipulate and control other nations.

As for the Israel conflict trying to drum up sympathy of the Israeli's, Israel ONLY EXISTS because the USA and their thug UK massacred thousands of Arabs and built the city of Israel over their corpses.

How would you like it if during the American civil war, if the South succeeded in getting European aid and defeating the Union to form the confederacy?

The USA always gets involved in civil wars, always propping up the losing side because the losing side in a desperate attempt to win will promise to allow the USA to buy up all their oil wells and mines while enslaving their citizens using multinationals. Modern slavery at its finest.

Any dictator that gathers up a group of religious and violent thugs in an attempt to overthrow the government will get backing from the USA in exchange the USA will suck up all their oil.

The country of Iraq is in shambles because of USA interference, USA started by putting Saddam into power, then giving Saddam weapons and urging him to attack Iran, then when Iraq lost and on the verge of bankruptcy they attacked Kuwait, which then caused the Iraq war and then the second Iraq war mostly because Saddam angry over the first war no longer wanted to be the USA's puppet.

Somewhere along the line the cause of everything always leads back to the USA.

A sad day when China understands the concept of freedom and self determination mire than the USA.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Chinaowns is pretty much the exact caricature of what Americans think a brain-washed commie is. Anyone with any sense here has just learned to ignore him and his ridiculous comments.

Brain washed commie?

I have lived in the USA all my life

Communism is not a bad thing, it is a dream that we should all strive for

Look at this, only with communism can the world achieve peace

 

[inddef]

Brain washed commie?

I have lived in the USA all my life

Communism is not a bad thing, it is a dream that we should all strive for

YouTube - China's last Maoist village - 25 June 2008

Look at this, only with communism can the world achieve peace

yep, you said it. you are a brain washed commie alright those who think communism in any form is a dream are basically blind to facts and history.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Look at this, only with communism can the world achieve peace

Sorry to ruin your dream... but China had a "market economy" since 1978.

In fact, we now have the second largest market economy on Earth.

Too bad for your dream.

 

[CardSharp]

Brain washed commie?

I have lived in the USA all my life

Communism is not a bad thing, it is a dream that we should all strive for

YouTube - China's last Maoist village - 25 June 2008

Look at this, only with communism can the world achieve peace

haha did you not watch the end of the video where they said they were going broke? A fitting microcosm of what would have been if China was still a Maoist country.

I'm not accusing you of being a brain washed commie just that you talk like one.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

yep, you said it. you are a brain washed commie alright those who think communism in any form is a dream are basically blind to facts and history.

How am I brainwashed? Its common sense that the best theoretical economic system is a communist one.

It is the prisoners dilemma

Two companies that work together, say a mining company and a steel making company would make more money teaming up rather than overcharging and undercharging each other.

A planned economy as demonstrated by modern China can maximize economic output by preventing economic crashes. China has gone 40 years with consistent economic growth without a single stock market crash.

However humans are not yet capable of handling it, but I believe that in the future people will be more intelligent than they are now and will be handle a equal society.

 

[CardSharp]

How am I brainwashed? Its common sense that the best theoretical economic system is a communist one.

It is the prisoners dilemma

Two companies that work together, say a mining company and a steel making company would make more money teaming up rather than overcharging and undercharging each other.

A planned economy as demonstrated by modern China can maximize economic output by preventing economic crashes. China has gone 40 years with consistent economic growth without a single stock market crash.

However humans are not yet capable of handling it, but I believe that in the future people will be more intelligent than they are now and will be handle a equal society.

40 years of growth? you must mean 30 because there was sure as hell no growth during the cultural revolution.

 

[inddef]

How am I brainwashed? Its common sense that the best theoretical economic system is a communist one.

It is the prisoners dilemma

Two companies that work together, say a mining company and a steel making company would make more money teaming up rather than overcharging and undercharging each other.

A planned economy as demonstrated by modern China can maximize economic output by preventing economic crashes. China has gone 40 years with consistent economic growth without a single stock market crash.

However humans are not yet capable of handling it, but I believe that in the future people will be more intelligent than they are now and will be handle a equal society.

you do know engineering but your handle on economics is very poor i must say.

 

[CardSharp]

Hey Chinaowns this is your perfect communist village from another point of view.