From: Convoy Magazine (convoymagazine@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat May 15 2004 - 11:46:16 PDT
--- Steve & Jeannie Keith <cckw@comcast.net> wrote:
> Combined with this that you only need a carrier
> force for certain things...
> They can challenge us in many other ways and they
> can use proxy's This IS the Chinese century and woe
to anyone who gets in their way! An interesting book:
"The Coming War With China" is quite a read.
>
Some good points raised by many of us on the list. Yes
anti terrorist stuff is getting way out of hand,
common sense and judgement by people with just a teeny
bit of authority is sorely lacking, but thats another
subject again.
as for china
My apologies to ZIPTAR ;-) re original China posting.
Gentlemen, re carriers and such,
Future superpower “wars” will be more economic (backed
with military potential), than with actual large scale
attacks, while so-called “low-intensity” conflicts
will be more AK47 and house to house stuff. In fact
to deal with localized conflicts, the US is currently
working on changed tactics- in developing
“carrier-like” non mil-spec ships stationed offshore
from which to deploy jump jets and helos so as not to
need “susceptible” land bases in “low intensity”
conflict zones. ( note however one can get just as
dead in a low intensity war as a full scale blowup)
Re low intensity:
Why hasn’t the US got Osama??? Because he refuses to
use high tech methods! He doenst use cell phones for
example which could be traced! He uses pigeons, land
lines and personal messengers..slow sure, but he’s
still out there isnt he!
Its kinda like the “death star” and the x-wing
fighters, The death star was designed as a high tech
machine against huge adversaries, not the lowly x-wing
fighters, which eventually manage to destroy it. OK a
bit far fetched but The US is super high tech, and
most conflict zones today involve very low tech stuff
against adversaries fully capable of suuicide and use
of innocent civilians, something generally quite
foreign to our sensibilities
The US had a hellova time in places like Somalia (see
“black hawk down”) Afghanistan, and now Iraq, their
high tech capability being limited against guys with
simple light mg and basic RPGs. I wont get into the
politics of it or the “rules of engagement” so to
speak.
Superpowers:
For now, if and when China decides its had enough of
Taiwan and chooses to invade, just see if the US will
react militarily. Why doesn’t the US do something
about Korea, which potentially poses more of a threat
than Iraq did? Could potential Chinese involvement be
a factor??
Same with Tibet, other than rattle sabres, the US wont
do anything. In spite of treaties, its just FAR TOO
RISKY.
Besides, now when countries get angry, they use trade
sanctions. When China becomes strong enough, and we
become dependant enough upon China it could simply
squeeze economically and others will absolutely hurt.
The world already fears Chinas economic potential, why
do you think just as a minor example- virtually no
major political leader will meet officially with the
Dalai Lama?
China is pretty much the only country left with an
independant economy. Ie it depends MUCH less on
outside trade sources (in relative terms) than anybody
else and could almost survive completely on its own,
which it pretty much did right up until WWII.
Besides China does not need carriers. I sincerely
doubt it has any thoughts of attacking the US directly
now or in the future, doesn’t need to., economic
strength comes first, military aspirations afterward..
Everywhere China might have designs, Taiwan for
example is only a stones throw away, India, Korea,
Russia etc even Japan , does not require carriers.
As if by some real stretch of the imigination, the US
decided to attack, it would be the one with resources
stretched across thousands of km of ocean. Im sure
that China is rapidly developing technological
responses to all kinds of potential scenarios
China meanwhile is HUGE, it has oil, it has iron ore,
minerals , foodstuffs etc etc etc. but maybe- just a
wild theory here, maybe its slowly using and using up
outside resources while building itslef up and saving
its own internal resources for some undetermined time
down the road, when there begins to be world wide
shortages.
Meanwhile, sure the US is big in bio tech and other
high tech stuff, but so is China and its very focussed
on developing and improving computerized and
electronic high tech stuff (Jane’s again) but in
addition, even US research and the economy generally
depends on manufactured products. Ie the bunsen
burners, petri dishes, computer screens, boots,
clothing, nylon rope, shipbuilding, etc etc etc are
possibly made in China. Wasn’t the Chinese version of
a Humvee posted on this list just a little while
ago??
Im extrapolating and exagerating a good deal now, but
lets face it. most science fiction of 50 years ago has
come to pass hasn’t it?
I agree Honda is a big US company now, they’re all
multinational …eg GM is German (Opel) and Ford British
(jaguar) and even in WWII Ford trucks were serving the
Nasties for example and even in wwI Britian was paying
Krupp steel royalties on patents for artillery shells
and stuff.
But Im less concerned about the name Honda on the car,
as long as it says Made in USA. I will strongly avoid
buying anything from offshore if I can.
Oh and by the way, a recent study I just heard about
analyzed many of histories wars and conflicts and drew
a parallel to a high percentage of young males in
relative terms to a specific population, ie when the
young male ratio exceeds a certain percentile, (alas I
forget what it was) you get conflicts and wars. China
with its one-child policy resulting in mostly males,
is perhaps “worrisome”
Its all just some “food for thought”.
(I think im up to $0.04 now ;-)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price.
http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:29:58 PDT