Chinese Dragon Awakens - Chinese Military Build-up

Current Events
41

AEGIS can detect the missiles the Chinese have but only under cretin conditions.

What are “cretin conditions”?

Plus even “if” (and that’s a big if) we did detect the missiles our counter measures are not that great.  AEGIS is old, and the Chinese by now most likely know how to operate around it.

Why do you make this assumption?

Plus the Chinese have more missiles to fire then we have to defend ourselves with. If China fired 15 missiles from different areas we probably would counter some, but many would end up hitting the carrier.

The layered defenses of a carrier battle group are designed to detect and defeat far more than 15 missiles.

42

The layered defenses of a carrier battle group are designed to detect and defeat far more than 15 missiles.

Aggreed. Ideally, a single AEGIS equipped ship could handle 15 missiles inbound much less a layered defence around a barrier around a capital ship. Plus, as mentioned in previous posts, even the Soviets short of actually inserting nukes into the carriers they didn’t think they could sink one. But then remember our carrier battle group is effectively networked so yes, using the Soviet idea of throw enough missiles at one direction and one is bound to hit. But I’d be willing to lay odds it’s going to be a picket ship that takes the bullet and not a carrier or one of the nuclear Navy.

And as mentioned in previous posts, the Chinese using going to the point of a nuke would cause such a negative reaction, assuming we didn’t respond in kind and send them further back into the stone age, the diplomatic fallout would be bad for business. And when it all boils down to it that is what this is all about. Business.

Or you could call it face. It’s a large part of the reason they are trying to acquire Unocal is so they can have bragging rights. As I said in previous posts China is like Saddam Husein: as long as was rattling his sabre and playing dictator he enjoyed being a part of the world club. It was once we actually got around to calling his bluff that things really started to suck and he was relegated to having his breakfast menu blogged by some national guardsman.

Sabre rattling and chest pounding is good for business as they see it. They know actually doing something as stupid as actually going to war is bad.

43

Yes, the United States should defend Taiwan in the case of a Chinese invasion because of the principle of world liberation that sent them into Iraq. I watched a recent documentary on Canada’s CBC, and they interviewed a Chinese official, who said that all it would take for them to invade Taiwan is for Taiwan to declare their independence. Taiwan is independent de facto, and Taipei is one of the strongest economies in the world. Just like France helped the revolutionary America, so the United States should defend Taiwan, and more, because its heritage is one as the first free men in history.

My understanding is that Nixon is the guy who opened up trade with China, perhaps because other of America’s trade partners were already trading with them. So for decades the best weapon against a communist regime has been de-activated: economic isolation. Now China is an important aspect of all the economies of the world. A devasting war in that region will be devastating to all the world.

I think the best thing is for capitalism to change the political climate in China. I think an internal revolution would be best for the world. However, if China were to attack then we must defend Taiwan, and I think this is the United States’ stance today. The world is not going to stop trading with China, no matter if that is the moral course.

If China invades Taiwan then Taiwan must be defended. This war would be bad for the world. But the United States is partly to blame given their foreign policy after WWII. The devastation to the world economies is the price the world will pay for their mistakes in the past. The proper action would be to defend Taiwan, and defend it with vigor and moral confidence.

44

I think the best thing is for capitalism to change the political climate in China.  I think an internal revolution would be best for the world. 

That is one thing I think everyone here can agree on. I remember back in the 80’s ARI produced tracts called “Captialist Solutions to Apartheid” Does anyone else remember those? Little brown paper jobs. Just an aside.

My understanding is that Nixon is the guy who opened up trade with China, perhaps because other of America’s trade partners were already trading with them.  So for decades the best weapon against a communist regime has been de-activated: economic isolation.  Now China is an important aspect of all the economies of the world.  A devasting war in that region will be devastating to all the world. 

An example of how capitalism cures many things. Nobody in their right mind would call China capitalist. But even the slightest injection of market forces into the most hideous Maoist collectivist society has helped transform China into its current fascist state form. Free trade creates partnerships and you are less likely to start shooting when you are trading becuase of the common interest. I doubt Castro would still be in power if American dollars flowed freely in Cuba but that is a split topic…

Mind you, that’s like saying you transformed from Soviet Russia to Fascist Germany. Hopefully with the natural role that money and an increasing size of the middle class will help but that is slow. Hopefully the internet will help the speed of change along with the success of Hong Kong and Maccau. Though I do feel sorry for the people of both colonies and hope the best for the people of Taiwan.

45

I doubt Castro would still be in power if American dollars flowed freely in Cuba but that is a split topic…

I agree. Decades ago, one might have been excused for trying a trade embargo. Experience shows that this does not bring down dictators. I’m reminded of this quote:

a fat, unhygienic rajah of India, …, with nothing to do but run precious gems through his fingers and, once in a while, stick a knife into the body of a starved, toil-dazed, germ-eaten creature, as a claim to a few grains of the creature’s rice, then claim it from hundreds of millions of such creatures and thus let the rice grains gather into gems.

Dictators have shown repeatedly that they can use force and fear to create a heirarchy of enough ruled creature for each of the rulers… enough to let the grains turn into gems for the rulers.

Consider this: even if one expects to go to war with a country, it makes sense to have been trading with them right upto the point that one really turns hostile. I think it would be much easier to gather intelligence about a country if many American businessmen were visiting there anyway. The negative, ofcourse, is that such trade would also make it easier for the potentially hostile nation to become a stronger opponent (e.g. by buying arms and generally becoming technically more advanced).

46

Consider this: even if one expects to go to war with a country, it makes sense to have been trading with them right upto the point that one really turns hostile. I think it would be much easier to gather intelligence about a country if many American businessmen were visiting there anyway. The negative, ofcourse, is that such trade would also make it easier for the potentially hostile nation to become a stronger opponent (e.g. by buying arms and generally becoming technically more advanced).

True. Obviously the greater presence we have the easier it is to spy. Plus the more we trade the better we understand how people work on a philospohical level. I can say with a good confidence that after watching my clients portfolios briefly I can tell how they think. Though there is a point somewhere that we have to draw a line about dealing with potentially hostile countries ala China. I may be dropping context but I could not see rationally allowing Ratheon to sell Los Angeles class attack boats to China. I know the more militant liberterian viewpoint is sell to everyone and anyone. My question then becomes a slippery slope of what market force determines who’s the bad guy we don’t sell to.

Still, there is something about the fact that one of our greatest allies, Israel, is selling arms and advice to China. I don’t have a problem with them selling arms because the arms industry is a critical industry in Israel but there is just something about it I can’t get over. Sure, the Russians and the French far surpass what the Israeli’s sell them arms wise but still it bugs me.

It would be like us selling patriots and uav’s to Syria or Jordan.

edit for proper analogy

47

I agree that there should be restrictions on what can be sold to countries we may be at war with in the future.

Here is another quandry. When allowing trade, governments tend to go soft on morally criticising the trading partner. (e.g. U.S. politicians staying a bit soft on China because there is so much busniess at stake.) This type of compromise is unacceptable. In a mixed economy, the China-trade-lobby will influence politicians, but ideally there should be no softening. Indeed, even trade should not be encouraged, only allowed.

Needless to say, altruistic foreign aid to potential enemies is ridiculous – unless it can be justified for some other reason (e.g. getting something in return).

48

I agree. Decades ago, one might have been excused for trying a trade embargo. Experience shows that this does not bring down dictators.

Trouble is, we have never tried a trade embargo against Cuba. While restrictions exist on American trade with Cuba, sales of food and agricultural products are allowed.

Furthermore, America has never tried to prevent Cuban trade with other nations.

A real, naval-blockade trade embargo would prevent any outside assistance from reaching the island. No food, no oil, no medicine, nothing.

How long would Castro last under those conditions? I don’t know. But we can’t say that embargoes have proven ineffective against dictators, because, as far as I know, we have never really tried one.

How long would the Iranian regime last under a total trade embargo? At present they are selling billions of dollars of oil and importing, among other things, food and weapons. How long would the regime last if all trade were stopped? I’d sure love to find out.

49

Trouble is, we have never tried a trade embargo against Cuba.  While restrictions exist on American trade with Cuba, sales of food and agricultural products are allowed.

Furthermore, America has never tried to prevent Cuban trade with other nations.

A real, naval-blockade trade embargo would prevent any outside assistance from reaching the island.  No food, no oil, no medicine, nothing. 

Closest thing we have to that is North Korea. They are about as isolated as a nation can get and I think we all know how well that has worked. Sure, China has always been a trading partner to provide support but even then their trading was limited.

50

Closest thing we have to that is North Korea.

See, and they’re not a very good example with all the aid given to them by us and the Soviet Union and China.

51

Far from being embargoed, the North Koreans are being bailed out, and it isn’t just the Chinese doing the bailing.

Since 1995, the following tons of food have been sent to North Korea

From U.S. - 2,063,894 tons

From China - 1,950,000 tons

From South Korea - 1, 900,000 tons

From Japan - 1,250,000 tons.

The evil, imperialistic capitalists in South Korea just announced another emergency shipment of 500,000 tons of rice to the worker’s paradise to the north.

In addition, North Korea has received fuel and assistance in building nuclear reactors (with which to extort still more aid from us):

China - $1.43 billion in fuel

South Korea - $1.36 billion in fuel

Japan - $481 million in fuel

U.S. - $405 million in fuel

E.U. - $121 million in fuel

You can see some facts and figures HERE.

The North Koreans insist that all aid be turned over to the government for “internal distribution”. So we can say with some certainty that we are helping the regime survive – they sure aren’t going hungry.

Then there is also NK’s sales of missiles and nuclear technology to the Iranians, but I can’t find any figures for that.

52

That was really my point about North Korea. They are about as embargoed of a nation as you can get over the last 50 years. So instead of letting the embargo do it’s job and force the issue they dump food onto the govt. and like every single other instance in the world, the food donations go to feed the military and government 1st and keep the dictatorship in power. The UN and other world governments just don’t have it to let embargos do their job. Just look at Iraq.

Can anyone think of the last time there was a genuine gunboat diplomacy styled embargo of a nation or an island? I am racking my brain and can’t think of one.

53

It seems that in order to find an actual “gunboat diplomacy styled embargo of a nation or an island” you’d have to go back to at least WWII. For example, the Japanese siege of the Philipines in 1941 and 1942. Kennedy actually sealed off Cuba during the missile crisis, but that stage of the embargo was pretty short lived. I can’t think of a true long-term embargo in peacetime.

54

It seems that in order to find an actual “gunboat diplomacy styled embargo of a nation or an island” you’d have to go back to at least WWII.  For example, the Japanese siege of the Philipines in 1941 and 1942.  Kennedy actually sealed off Cuba during the missile crisis, but that stage of the embargo was pretty short lived.  I can’t think of a true long-term embargo in peacetime.

Without looking it up, I thought Kennedy was just going to demand any ship trying to get to Cuba be searched. If the Soviets sent a ship to Cuba, if it was inspected and only carried grains then it would be sent through.

55

Can anyone think of the last time there was a genuine gunboat diplomacy styled embargo of a nation or an island? I am racking my brain and can’t think of one.

Scott, the only one I can think of was the embargo the North imposed on the South during the U.S. civil war. As I recall, it was reasonably effective. The loss of the European cotton market hurt the South’s economy and war effort.

56

An embargo of China would only be possible with a fully mobilized war effort. Even then it would be tough to catch everything. Are we going to blow up a French ship bring ing supplies to the Chinese? Probably not. Can we blow the crap out of it once its off the boat. You bet.

China is already an oil starved country. Mobilizing for a war and conducting a war would run them dry. Especially since we would blow the crap out of all of the known oil reserves in the 1st week. So that is why I’m saying it would be over in 3 weeks.

57

Scott, the only one I can think of was the embargo the North imposed on the South during the U.S. civil war.  As I recall, it was reasonably effective.  The loss of the European cotton market hurt the South’s economy and war effort.

That was just about the last one that came to my mind as well. Sure there were a small number of blockade runners but for the most part the blockade was pretty effective. I know there are bound to be some equivalents in modern day African civil wars right and left.

58

Without looking it up, I thought Kennedy was just going to demand any ship trying to get to Cuba be searched. If the Soviets sent a ship to Cuba, if it was inspected and only carried grains then it would be sent through.

Yep, now that I think about it a little more, I bet you’re right.

59

Does anyone know the true nuclear capabilities/range that China has? I’m all for defending Taiwan (I really wanted to visit the place sometime during or after college, I hope I still can), but I really, really dislike the idea of a nuke hitting Los Angeles.

Also, as I am a bit rusty (read: completely ignorant, heh) on our military operations, is it known if we have any espionage and/or secret CIA ops going on in China? I suppose a CIA operation would be less effective in a country as large and well-established as China than it is for tin-pot South and Central American dictatorships.

60

Also, as I am a bit rusty (read: completely ignorant, heh) on our military operations, is it known if we have any espionage and/or secret CIA ops going on in China?  I suppose a CIA operation would be less effective in a country as large and well-established as China than it is for tin-pot South and Central American dictatorships.

If we know that then they wouldn’t be doing a very good job, would they?

Our intelligence on China is supposed to be notoriously bad.