East Asia allies doubt U.S. could win war with China

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Quote:

East Asia allies doubt U.S. could win war with China

The overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China. It has been an assessment relayed to U.S. government officials over the past few months by countries such as Australia, Japan and South Korea. This comes as President Bush wraps up a visit to Asia, in which he sought to strengthen U.S. ties with key allies in the region.

Most Asian officials have expressed their views privately. Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara has gone public, warning that the United States would lose any war with China.

"In any case, if tension between the United States and China heightens, if each side pulls the trigger, though it may not be stretched to nuclear weapons, and the wider hostilities expand, I believe America cannot win as it has a civic society that must adhere to the value of respecting lives," Mr. Ishihara said in an address to the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Mr. Ishihara said U.S. ground forces, with the exception of the Marines, are "extremely incompetent" and would be unable to stem a Chinese conventional attack. Indeed, he asserted that China would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons against Asian and American cities—even at the risk of a massive U.S. retaliation.

The governor said the U.S. military could not counter a wave of millions of Chinese soldiers prepared to die in any onslaught against U.S. forces. After 2,000 casualties, he said, the U.S. military would be forced to withdraw.

"Therefore, we need to consider other means to counter China," he said. "The step we should be taking against China, I believe, is economic containment."

Officials acknowledge that Mr. Ishihara's views reflect the widespread skepticism of U.S. military capabilities in such countries as Australia, India, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. They said the U.S.-led war in Iraq has pointed to the American weakness in low-tech warfare.

"When we can't even control parts of Anbar, they get the message loud and clear," an official said, referring to the flashpoint province in western Iraq.

As a result, Asian allies of the United States are quietly preparing to bolster their militaries independent of Washington. So far, the Bush administration has been strongly opposed to an indigenous Japanese defense capability, fearing it would lead to the expulsion of the U.S. military presence from that country.

On Nov. 16, Mr. Bush met with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. The two leaders discussed the realignment of the U.S. military presence in Japan and Tokyo's troop deployment in Iraq.

During his visit to Washington in early November, Mr. Ishihara met senior U.S. defense officials. They included talks with U.S. Defense Deputy Undersecretary for Asian and Pacific Affairs Richard Lawless to discuss the realignment of the U.S. military presence in Japan.

For his part, Mr. Ishihara does not see China as evolving into a stable democracy with free elections.

"I believe such predictions are totally wrong," Mr. Ishihara said.

Source

The very thought of invading China would be ludicrous....you would need every man, woman, and child in the US just to operate an 'occupation' force.

A Question.

If attacked by another country, should the U.S. help defend militarily, even though it could cost American soldiers their lives in such hot spots as Israel, Taiwan, South Korea...?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,585 • Replies: 33

No top replies

Only if our national security interests are at risk.

I am not convonced those 3 nations would qualify.

0 Replies

This all depends on your definition of win...

Nuclear weapons aside (Since this is a nightmare scenario that no one wants to contemplate)

Could we defend say... Taiwan from a Chinese invasion?

Well, the U.S. Navy and Air Force should be able to keep any transport ships from coming anywhere near Taiwan's shores so I think we could do ok there.

We have difficulties in places like Iraq, because our forces have trained for the past 50+ years to fight a conventional man vs man, tank vs tank, plane vs plane wars and as a result, we have gotten very very good at it. (Just ask the Republican Guard's Medina and Takawanda Divisions)

We would never invade China, but lets assume worst case and China decides to invade South Korea through their friends in North Korea.

Could we win such a war?

Depending on how quickly we could get the 'heavy' divisions (1st Armored, 1st Cavalry, 1st-3rd Mechanized) on the ground with all their equipment, the answer is probably yes.

The exchange ratio of U.S. M1A2 tanks to Russian designed T-80 and T-90 tanks is enormous. Add in AH-64 Apaches and the U.S. Air Force and you will have a horrific meatgrinder that will chew up men and machines in massive numbers.

What about China herself?

Well, the U.S. public has tied the hands of the government on the subject of mass civilian casualties (Rightly so since mass bombardment of civilians has never proven to be effective at anything other than racking up a body count.)

So what can we do to China herself?

We could drop nearly every major bridge and railroad trestle in the country. Most powerplants, dams and any other power generation facilities could be eliminated. Without a decent transport infrastructure, they would have massive problems in keeping their people or army supplied with their minimum basic needs. Without power, they have been reduced to the 19th Century.

We could bring their transport and economy to a grinding halt...
We could destroy their power generation and infrastructure...
We could smash just about any conventional force they put in the field...

But I guess it depends on your definition of WIN is.

0 Replies

I doubt occupation would ever be a goal. The only way a war with China would happen is with the Chinese taking the offensive. Were that the case, Europe and Russia would probably support the US in defense and attack China as well.

The US military is second to none.

0 Replies

Iraq didn't qualify either as a threat to national security. ah, i forget, WMDs. No, but seriously, as far as I've been following the rhetoric of the administration, democracy was inserted among the national interests at the beginning of the Iraq war. in such case then, israel, taiwan, south korea, you name it... all would qualify.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I doubt occupation would ever be a goal. The only way a war with China would happen is with the Chinese taking the offensive. Were that the case, Europe and Russia would probably support the US in defense and attack China as well.

The US military is second to none.

I believe China is well aware of the doctrine of mutual destruction. I do not see why or how China could ever take the "first shot" without launching missles at our homeland. I do not forsee how a Pearl Harbor style attack could be accomplished today. That would leave only some form of missle attack.

We do not know for sure how many they have or even if they can actually reach the mainland from there. We know we can reach their homeland from here or anywhere in the world.

For these reasons, I do not see China starting a war.

Korea? Their leader may be crazy enough.

PS: Why would China want to go to war with the US anyway?

0 Replies

Quote:

PS: Why would China want to go to war with the US anyway?

Are you not aware of this news story ?

China: We'd nuke U.S.
if provoked over Taiwan
Major general says Beijing prepared to use WMDs against American cities

Quote:

A Chinese military official says Beijing will use nuclear weapons against the U.S. if the Americans attack the Asian nation in a fight over Taiwan.

"If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons," Zhu Chenghu, a major general in the People's Liberation Army, said at an official briefing, according to the Financial Times.

0 Replies

Quote:

if the Americans attack the Asian nation in a fight over Taiwan.

I don't see this happening.

0 Replies

Is Taiwan worth mutual destruction?

Not in my opinion and I do not support GW's statement that we would defend Taiwan. I also doubt this Congress would give GW the authorization.

I can not think of any security reason why we should defend Taiwan.

0 Replies

Quote:

I don't see this happening.

Wrong!

Quote:

President Bush has vowed to protect Taiwan against attack and Washington has watched the passage of the Bill with growing concern...TimesOnLine

0 Replies

Bush won't be around forever....hopefully.

0 Replies

China is drawing close to us in terms of naval power, and can afford to lose many more people because the size of their army makes our army look like an ant next to a giant. They have a 200 million man army, they have stolen our secrets when it comes to aircraft and nuclear technology. They have an abundunce of nuclear power, and a will to fight that we cannot match. I'd consider a war btwn china and america a draw, because we have no nuclear superiority over them, we don't have the stomach to fight like they do.

That is why I think it is presumptious to assume china doesn't want war with us, or could not beat us in a conventional or nonconvential war. That premise is false.

0 Replies

They definitely don't like anyone dabbling in their business, but I see it as they need us as much as we need them in the end. When it comes down to it our ties with China will trump protecting Taiwan IMO.....not to mention avoiding war with them for reasons you gave.

0 Replies

freedom4free wrote:

China is drawing close to us in terms of naval power

In what hallucinogenic delusion did you come up with this statement?

China's navy isn't even close to us in number and is hopelessly outclassed in experience and quality.

Lets see the numbers:
Major Carriers (CVN and CV)
China: 0
U.S.: 11

Amphibious Assault Ships (LPH, LHA, LHD)
These are comparable to the carriers serving in many other countries Navy, we use them to support our Marines in amphibious operations.
China: 0
U.S.: 7

Cruisers (CG, CGN)
China: 0
U.S.: 27

Destroyers (DD, DDG)
China: 21
U.S.: 50

Frigates (FF, FFG)
China: 36
U.S.: 32

Attack Submarines (SS, SSN)
China: 66 (30+ of which are obsolete Russian castoffs)
U.S.: 52

Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBN)
China: 1
U.S.: 17

I can see how you could become confused, the numbers are SO close. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

freedom4free wrote:
China is drawing close to us in terms of naval power

In what hallucinogenic delusion did you come up with this statement?

China's navy isn't even close to us in number and is hopelessly outclassed in experience and quality.

Lets see the numbers:
Major Carriers (CVN and CV)
China: 0
U.S.: 11

Amphibious Assault Ships (LPH, LHA, LHD)
These are comparable to the carriers serving in many other countries Navy, we use them to support our Marines in amphibious operations.
China: 0
U.S.: 7

Cruisers (CG, CGN)
China: 0
U.S.: 27

Destroyers (DD, DDG)
China: 21
U.S.: 50

Frigates (FF, FFG)
China: 36
U.S.: 32

Attack Submarines (SS, SSN)
China: 66 (30+ of which are obsolete Russian castoffs)
U.S.: 52

Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBN)
China: 1
U.S.: 17

I can see how you could become confused, the numbers are SO close.

Where is your source ?

Maybe by themselves, they do not have nearly enough to destroy America's nuclear triad

even though they are advancing very quickly in other areas of military tech they could not defeat America alone, only with the help of Russia.

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Almanac/PRCForces.shtml
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/index.html
http://www.missilethreat.com/missiles/index.html

Other countries in the region have lost faith in America's ability and willingness to protect them.

0 Replies

freedom4free wrote:

Where is your source ?

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/our_ships.asp
http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/

freedom4free wrote:

Maybe by themselves, they do not have nearly enough to destroy America's nuclear triad

I'm glad you accept their limitations. Even at their height, the Soviet Union didn't have enough firepower to destroy our nuclear triad, that why MAD worked for all those years.

freedom4free wrote:

even though they are advancing very quickly in other areas of military tech they could not defeat America alone, only with the help of Russia.

As they advance, so do we. It is hard to make up a 20+ year tech gap. While they are building machines to copy your current tech, you are building the next generation of tech items.

As to the last, what in the world makes you think that Russia would ever throw in with the Chinese? A strong aggressive China is the one thing they fear above all else. It is a pipe dream to put them in bed with the Chinese.

freedom4free wrote:

Other countries in the region have lost faith in America's ability and willingness to protect them.

I don't think that is true, it is merely the babbling of a few self-serving demagogues like the Governor of Tokyo.

0 Replies

the chinese do not have to go to war to destroy the US.

all they have to do is sell off their US dollars.

it is called asymetric warfare. kill off your adversary's economy without firing a shot.. and US capitalists encourage this at the detrement of the nation at large.

the chinese think in terms of a quarter century, americans think to the next fiscal quarter.

we are eating our seed corn and all the capitalists say is " shop at wal-mart."

I do not trust the chinese gvernment. it is a murderous regime that should be handled with the care you handle a poisonous snake.

I deal with chinese businessmen regularly. and only because i have to, but i do not trust them, ever. they are a bunch of lying, sneaky bastards who will break a contract or circumvent it the second they see an economic advantage to do so. they have no ethics at all.

first, to deal with china's economic attacks on the US economy. insist on high tariffs of items that come from state controlled industries, second, attack them at the WTO at every step for dumping. third, stop deficet spending, and if that means raising taxes, so be it. I would rather have americans pay for our own government than borrow chinese money to run it and then be beholden to them for th money.

what fool borrows money from an enemy? and have no illusions, there are 1.3 billion chinese, and they are the enemy of the West, and western civilization, not al Quaeda

0 Replies

Quote:

The Approaching Chinese Cyber Storm
July 21st, 2005

On numerous occasions in the past, China's authoritarian regime has publicly stated that the U.S. is its ideological enemy. Comments made by Chinese defector Chen Yonglin to Australian authorities in June support the theory that China's leaders view the U.S. as their main adversary.

"The U.S. is considered by the Chinese Communist Party as the largest enemy, the major strategic rival. The U.S. occupies a unique place in China's diplomacy."

With inflammatory statements like those noted by Chen Yonglin, it is easy to understand why national security questions still resonate in Washington from the December purchase of IBM's PC division by China's largest computer company Lenovo. Although eventually approved by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS), critical questions concerning the ultimate use of the company's state-of-the-art computers as they relate to state-sponsored cyber crime and hacking attacks, still remain largely unanswered.

Specifically, could Lenovo computers or other domestic computers be used by Beijing to initiate a coordinated cyber attack against the U.S. to fracture the stability of global financial markets, interrupt international communications, damage interconnected security networks and harm the overall effectiveness and rapid response capabilities of the U.S. military?

If history is any indication, the possibility of such an attack is authentic and should be given serious attention.

Washington should be deeply concerned about the growing possibility of a massive, state-sponsored cyber attack against U.S. interests originating from mainland China. However, the opposite seems to be true. Surprisingly, there seems to be a dangerous lack of leadership, information sharing, structural flexibility and vision in the area of cyber security. "They are ignoring cyber security and it poses an enormous vulnerability," said Edward Lazowska, professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Washington.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4665

0 Replies

dagmaraka wrote:

Iraq didn't qualify either as a threat to national security. ah, i forget, WMDs. No, but seriously, as far as I've been following the rhetoric of the administration, democracy was inserted among the national interests at the beginning of the Iraq war. in such case then, israel, taiwan, south korea, you name it... all would qualify.

Iraq, as the president said over and over, was invaded to resolve the longstanding WMD issue once and for all, as it did.

0 Replies

freedom4free wrote:

They have an abundunce of nuclear power,

Don't be ridiculous. They don't have enough power for their econo... oh, you mean as in nuclear weapons. Ah, silly me. Wait, the number of nuclear weapons they have can't match with the US. Still, the US has way too much and maybe China has just about enough.

If I ever get employed, I'll be sure to remember kuvasz that you don't trust me.

Still, I wonder what happened to the Chinese sense of honour that was so present in the olden days? Sometimes I wish we could be more like the Japanese when it comes to honour.

And yes, the Chinese don't have to go to war to cripple the US. In fact, I'm wondering why the other nations that the US owe money to aren't twisting American arms right about now...

0 Replies

East Asia allies doubt U.S. could win war with China

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know